U.S. Postal Service: Factors Affecting Fund-Raising Stamp Sales
Suggest Lessons Learned (30-SEP-05, GAO-05-953).
Congress has directed the U.S. Postal Service to issue three
fund-raising stamps, also called semipostals, since 1998. These
stamps are sold at a higher price than First-Class stamps, with
the difference going to federal agencies for specific causes. The
proceeds from the three stamps address breast cancer research,
assistance to families of emergency personnel killed or
permanently disabled in the terrorist attacks of September 11,
and domestic violence. The law authorizing the Breast Cancer
Research stamp directed GAO to report on the fund-raising
results. To provide additional information to the Congress, GAO
expanded the study to include all three semipostals. GAO's study
addressed (1) the amounts raised and the factors affecting sales,
(2) how the designated agencies used the proceeds and reported
the results, and (3) lessons learned for the Postal Service,
agencies receiving the proceeds, and others.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-05-953
ACCNO: A38857
TITLE: U.S. Postal Service: Factors Affecting Fund-Raising Stamp
Sales Suggest Lessons Learned
DATE: 09/30/2005
SUBJECT: Breast cancer
Cancer research
Dependents
Families
Federal funds
First responders
Funds management
Lessons learned
Postal law
Postal rates
Postal service
Program evaluation
Reporting requirements
Postage stamps
Domestic abuse
USPS Breast Cancer Research Semipostal
Program
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-05-953
United States Government Accountability Office
GAO Report to Congressional Committees
September 2005
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE
Factors Affecting Fund-Raising Stamp Sales Suggest Lessons Learned
a
GAO-05-953
Highlights of GAO-05-953, a report to congressional committees
Congress has directed the U.S. Postal Service to issue three fundraising
stamps, also called semipostals, since 1998. These stamps are sold at a
higher price than First-Class stamps, with the difference going to federal
agencies for specific causes. The proceeds from the three stamps address
breast cancer research, assistance to families of emergency personnel
killed or permanently disabled in the terrorist attacks of September 11,
and domestic violence.
The law authorizing the Breast Cancer Research stamp directed GAO to
report on the fund-raising results. To provide additional information to
Congress, GAO expanded the study to include all three semipostals. GAO's
study addressed (1) the amounts raised and the factors affecting sales,
(2) how the designated agencies used the proceeds and reported the
results, and (3) lessons learned for the Postal Service, agencies
receiving the proceeds, and others.
To enhance accountability for semipostal proceeds, GAO recommends that
agencies receiving the proceeds issue annual reports to Congress on their
use of the proceeds. The Postal Service generally agreed with the report's
findings. The Department of Defense concurred with the recommendation. The
other agencies did not comment.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-953.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact Katherine Siggerud at (202)
512-2834 or [email protected].
September 2005
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE
Factors Affecting Fund-Raising Stamp Sales Suggest Lessons Learned
Over $56 million has been raised through semipostal sales as of June 2005,
and sales were likely affected by several key factors. Individually,
proceeds totaled $44 million for the Breast Cancer Research stamp, over
$10.5 million for the Heroes of 2001 stamp, and nearly $2 million for the
Stop Family Violence stamp. Sales patterns and levels differed greatly,
with four key factors affecting sales patterns: (1) fund-raising cause,
(2) support of advocacy groups, (3) stamp design, and (4) promotion by the
Postal Service.
The designated federal agencies currently award or plan to award grants
with the proceeds; none of the agencies has reported specifically on
results. Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds have been used to award
research grants by the National Institutes of Health and the Department of
Defense. No grants have yet been awarded with the proceeds from the two
other semipostals. The Federal Emergency Management Agency plans to
distribute Heroes of 2001 stamp proceeds through grants to families of
emergency personnel killed or permanently disabled from the September 11
attacks, while the Department of Health and Human Services plans to use
Stop Family Violence stamp proceeds for grants to organizations for
projects aimed at enhancing services to children exposed to domestic
violence.
Key lessons that have emerged from the three semipostals:
o The nature of the charitable cause can greatly affect sales patterns
and other results. A disaster, for example, is more likely to have a brief
but intense response, while an ongoing health issue will have a longer
one.
o Early and continued involvement of advocacy groups helps sustain
semipostal support.
o Stamp design, promotion, and clear understanding about how proceeds
will be used can greatly affect consumers' response.
o Semipostals generate proceeds immediately, but the logistics of using
the moneys raised takes much longer.
o Reporting can enhance accountability. Congress included a reporting
requirement in the Semipostal Authorization Act of 2000, but these three
semipostals are not subject to that requirement.
Breast Cancer Research, Heroes of 2001, and Stop Family Violence Stamps
Source: U.S. Postal Service.
Contents
Letter
Results in Brief
Background
Semipostals Have Raised Over $56 Million, with Several Factors
Likely Affecting Sales Semipostal Proceeds Will Be Used for Grants, with
Limited
Reporting on Specific Uses Lessons Learned from Existing Semipostals
Conclusion Recommendation for Executive Action Agency Comments and Our
Evaluation
1 4 8
12
23 32 38 38 39
Appendixes
Appendix I: Appendix II:
Appendix III: Appendix IV:
Appendix V:
Appendix VI: Appendix VII: Scope and Methodology
Postal Service Semipostal Costs and Semipostal Cost Recovery Regulation
Changes
Semipostal Design
NIH Breast Cancer Research Awards Funded with Breast Cancer Research Stamp
Proceeds
DOD Breast Cancer Research Awards Funded with Breast Cancer Research Stamp
Proceeds
Comments from the U.S. Postal Service
Comments from the Department of Defense
41
44 51
53
58 60 62
Tables Table 1: Table 2:
Table 3: Table 4: Table 5: Table 6: Table 7:
Semipostal Stakeholders and Related Roles 9
Examples of Promotional Efforts Undertaken by Breast
Cancer Advocacy Groups to Support the Breast Cancer
Research Stamp 17
Examples of Service National Advertising, Promotional,
and Partnership Efforts in Support of the Semipostals 22
NIH and DOD GrantsUsing Breast Cancer Research Stamp
Proceeds 25
Select Research Findings from NIH and DOD Grants
Funded with Breast Cancer Research Stamp Proceeds 27
ACF Grants Using Stop Family Violence Stamp
Proceeds 28
FEMA Grants Using Heroes of 2001 Stamp Proceeds 30
Contents
Table 8: Agencies, Advocacy Groups, and Organizations that GAO Interviewed
About Factors Affecting Semipostal Sales 42 Table 9: Semipostal Costs
Incurred and Recovered by the Service, through March 31, 2005 45
Table 10: Breast Cancer Research Stamp Costs Incurred and Recovered by the
Service from Inception through March 31, 2005 46
Table 11: Heroes of 2001 Stamp Costs Incurred and Recovered by the Service
from Inception through March 31, 2005 47 Table 12: Stop Family Violence
Stamp Costs Incurred and Recovered by the Service from Inception through
March 31, 2005 48
Table 13: Insight Awards to Stamp Out Breast Cancer Funded with Proceeds,
as of April 2005, from Breast Cancer Research Stamp Sales 53
Table 14: Exceptional Opportunities in Breast Cancer Research Funded with
Proceeds, as of April 2005, from Breast Cancer Research Stamp Sales 56
Table 15: Idea Awards for Breast Cancer Research Funded with Proceeds, as
of April 2005, from Breast Cancer Research Stamp Sales 58
Figures Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3: Figure 4:
Figure 5:
Figure 6:
Figure 7:
Figure 8:
Number of Semipostals Sold Annually, in Millions,
through May 31, 2005 5
Breast Cancer Research, Heroes of 2001, and Stop Family
Violence Stamps 9
Authorized Sales Period of the Three Semipostals 10
Number of Semipostals Sold by Quarter, in Millions,
through May 31, 2005 13
Heroes of 2001 Stamp Featured on NASCAR Busch Series
Professional Stock Car 15
Service Counter Card Showing the Semipostals and
Information about How Proceeds Would Be Used 20
Photos of White House Kickoff Events for Each of the
Semipostals 23
The Breast Cancer Research, Heroes of 2001, and Stop
Family Violence Stamps 51
Contents
Abbreviations
ACF Administration for Children and Families
BBB Better Business Bureau
DOD Department of Defense
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
HHS Department of Health and Human Services
NCI National Cancer Institute
NIH National Institutes of Health
OMB Office of Management and Budget
Win ABC Women's Information Network Against Breast Cancer
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.
A
United States Government Accountability Office Washington, D.C. 20548
September 30, 2005
The Honorable Susan M. Collins
Chairman
The Honorable Joseph I. Lieberman
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
United States Senate
The Honorable Tom Davis
Chairman
The Honorable Henry A. Waxman
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on Government Reform
House of Representatives
Since 1998, Congress has called for the U.S. Postal Service (Service) to
issue the first three fund-raising stamps in the nation's history. These
stamps, called "semipostals," are First-Class postage stamps that are sold
at
a premium over their postage value, in order to help provide funding for a
designated charitable cause. The semipostal proceeds are transferred from
the Service to designated federal agencies that administer the funds.1 The
three semipostals include the following:
o the Breast Cancer Research stamp, issued in 1998, which funds breast
cancer research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the
Department of Defense (DOD);
o the Heroes of 2001 stamp, issued in 2002 to assist the families of
emergency relief personnel who were killed or permanently disabled in the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, through a program administered by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); and
1Prior to transferring the proceeds to agencies, the Service is to deduct
costs attributable to the semipostals that would not normally be incurred
for comparable stamps.
o the Stop Family Violence stamp, issued in 2003 to fund domestic
violence prevention programs at the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).2
Although each of the three existing semipostals was mandated by Congress,
the Semipostal Authorization Act of 2000 gave the Service the authority to
issue and sell semipostals on its own "in order to advance such causes as
the Service considers to be in the national public interest and
appropriate."3 This act and the related regulations establish the criteria
for such things as selecting causes, establishing prices, and reporting
annually on how the money is being used. The existing semipostals were not
issued under this authority and only certain provisions of this act apply
to them. Although the Service has not yet exercised this authority, new
semipostals continue to be proposed by Congress, and advocates and
fund-raising experts view semipostals as an easy way for the public to
contribute funds to charitable causes.
The Stamp Out Breast Cancer Act required that we issue a report to
Congress on the Breast Cancer Research stamp no later than 3 months before
the end of the stamp's authorized sales period.4 We issued our first
report under this requirement in April 2000, and Congress has subsequently
extended the sales period for the stamp three times, resulting in a
follow-on report in September 2003 and this study.5 The authorized sales
period for the Breast Cancer Research stamp is currently scheduled to
expire December 31, 2005. However, legislation is currently pending that
would extend the sales period for the Breast Cancer Research stamp until
2The Stamp Out Breast Cancer Act (P.L. 105-41) required that the Service
issue a Breast Cancer Research stamp. The 9/11 Heroes Stamp Act of 2001
and the Stamp Out Domestic Violence Act of 2001 mandated that the Service
issue semipostals for these causes. Both the Heroes of 2001 and Stop
Family Violence stamps were authorized as part of the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2002 (P.L. 107-67).
3P.L. 106-253.
4P.L. 105-41.
5GAO, Breast Cancer Research Stamp: Millions Raised for Research, but
Better Cost Recovery Criteria Needed, GAO/GGD-00-80 (Washington, D.C.:
Apr. 28, 2000) and Breast Cancer Research Stamp: Effective Fund-Raiser,
but Better Reporting and Cost-Recovery Criteria Needed, GAO-03-1021
(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 30, 2003).
December 31, 2007.6 To provide additional information to Congress, we have
expanded this current study to all three semipostals. Accordingly, this
report examines (1) the amount of money raised by the semipostals and what
factors appear to have affected sales; (2) how the designated federal
agencies used funds raised by the semipostals and how they reported
results; and (3) the lessons learned from these semipostals for the
Service, agencies receiving semipostal proceeds, and other stakeholders.
Appendix II of this report also provides information on the costs
associated with the semipostal program and the status of our
recommendations regarding costrecovery criteria made to the Postmaster
General in our September 2003 report.
To address these objectives, we obtained detailed sales and cost
information from the Service on each of the three semipostals and gathered
information from a broad spectrum of federal officials, fund-raising
experts, and advocacy groups, about each of the semipostals and the
related charitable causes. We interviewed officials from the Service and
the federal agencies receiving semipostal proceeds and gathered and
reviewed agency documents pertaining to semipostal programs. We consulted
organizations with fund-raising expertise, such as the Association of
Fundraising Professionals, the American Red Cross, and the Better Business
Bureau's (BBB) Wise Giving Alliance, about fund-raising patterns and
factors that influence fund-raising efforts for different charitable
causes. In addition, we identified and interviewed key national advocacy
groups affiliated with breast cancer, emergency personnel affected by the
terrorist attacks of September 11, and domestic violence prevention
regarding their opinions about and experiences with the semipostals. See
appendix I for more details regarding our scope and methodology.
We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Service,
Administration for Children and Families (ACF), DOD, FEMA, HHS and NIH.
The Service and DOD provided written comments, which are reprinted in
appendixes VI and VII, respectively. ACF, FEMA, HHS and NIH did not
provide comments on this report. We conducted our review from January 2005
through August 2005 according to generally accepted government auditing
standards.
6On September 28, 2005, the Senate passed S. 37, which reauthorizes P.L.
105-41 through December 31, 2007.
Results in Brief Over $56 million has been raised through sales of
semipostals to date, and several key factors likely affected sales.
Individually, the Breast Cancer Research stamp has raised $44 million, the
Heroes of 2001 stamp over $10.5 million, and the Stop Family Violence
stamp nearly $2 million as of June 30, 2005. The sales patterns and levels
for each of the semipostals differed greatly, with the Breast Cancer
Research stamp remaining at a comparably high sales level for several
years, while the Heroes of 2001 and Stop Family Violence stamp have
experienced drop-offs in sales after the first few months (see fig. 1).
The higher sales total for the Breast Cancer Research stamp partly
reflects the fact that it has been for sale longer than the other
semipostals. In addition, on the basis of our discussions with the various
agencies and organizations involved, four other key factors appear to have
affected sales for the three semipostals. These key factors are (1) the
fundraising causes, including the degree to which people were aware of the
cause and motivated to support it; (2) the promotional capabilities and
activities of affiliated advocacy groups; (3) the designs of the
semipostals; and (4) the promotional activities of the Service. These
factors play central roles in the lessons learned from evaluating sales of
these semipostals.
Figure 1: Number of Semipostals Sold Annually, in Millions, through May 31, 2005
Number of semipostals sold in millions Q4Q1Q2
Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year
Breast Cancer Research
Heroes of 2001
Stop Family Violence
Source: U.S. Postal Service.
The designated federal agencies that receive semipostal proceeds currently
award or plan to distribute the funds through grants; and, while the
agencies have information on how these funds are used, none of the
agencies had reported specifically on their use of semipostal proceeds,
including grant outcomes, to Congress, other stakeholders, or the public.
Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds provide funding for research grants
administered by NIH and DOD. As of May 31, 2005, the NIH had awarded about
$16 million for research grants that have produced such results as patents
on antitumor drugs and new cancer detection methods, and the DOD had
awarded about $11 million in grants intended to encourage innovative
approaches to breast cancer research. No grants had yet been awarded with
the proceeds from the other two semipostals. FEMA intends to make grants
available to eligible families of emergency relief personnel who were
killed or permanently disabled as a result of the September 11 terrorist
attacks with the proceeds from the Heroes of 2001 stamp. FEMA made a
decision that it would wait until it received all semipostal proceeds
before making funds available to eligible families. FEMA had to establish
a new mechanism for distributing the funds, given
that the cause addresses a unique event. HHS, which began receiving
proceeds from the Stop Family Violence stamp in May 2004, plans to use the
proceeds to fund projects focused on the enhancement and distribution of
services for children exposed to domestic violence. The Semipostal
Authorization Act calls for annual reports on the use of proceeds, but
these three semipostals were not issued under this act, and the reporting
requirement does not apply. Both NIH and DOD provide limited reporting on
the use of Breast Cancer Research stamp funds through reports on research
programs in general, though these reports do not focus on semipostal
proceeds. In part as a result of our work, FEMA recently provided Congress
with information about the amount of proceeds that the agency has received
through sales of the Heroes of 2001 stamp and stated the agency will
provide a report summarizing the program next year. HHS plans to report
specifically on its use of Stop Family Violence stamp proceeds.
Key lessons that emerge from the three semipostals stem both from the
factors affecting sales and the agency uses of semipostal proceeds:
o Charitable causes selected for a semipostal can greatly affect the arc
of the fund-raising effort and other results achieved.
Semipostal sales reflected differences among disaster response, ongoing
social and health fund-raising causes, as well as among causes with
greater or lesser amounts of appeal. For example, the Heroes of 2001
stamp-which dealt with a catastrophic, high-visibility event that stirred
strong emotional reaction among a wide portion of the population-had over
50 percent of its sales within the initial two-quarters. The Breast Cancer
Research stamp, which deals with an ongoing health issue, has never
achieved a quarterly sales level matching the highest sales levels of the
Heroes of 2001 stamp, but has continued to see steady sales throughout the
7 years it has been available and has higher average sales over time.
Likewise, the popularity of charitable causes can affect the amounts
raised by semipostals addressing such issues. For example, the Breast
Cancer Research stamp addresses a charitable cause with a high profile and
has had high sales levels over time, while the Stop Family Violence
stamp-which raises money for a cause that may generate a more complex
response-has had average sales that are less than onefourth of those of
the Breast Cancer Research stamp.
o Early and continued involvement of advocacy groups helps sustain
semipostal support. After committing about $1 million to each advertising
campaign for the Breast Cancer Research and Heroes
of 2001 stamps, the Service experienced budget reductions and consequently
implemented a new policy to no longer advertise individual stamps,
including semipostals. Additionally, none of the agencies receiving
semipostal proceeds has contributed to a formal advertising campaign.
Absent a formal campaign, advocacy groups and individuals involved with a
charitable cause are the best source of promotion for semipostals. For
example, the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation has featured the
Breast Cancer Research stamp in its publications and newsletter, which is
sent to one million people. On the contrary, large national advocacy
groups addressing issues of family violence or victims of September 11
have not had enduring efforts to promote the other semipostals.
o Stamp design, how extensively a semipostal is promoted, and information
about the use of proceeds can greatly affect the extent to which consumers
support the semipostal. While some consumers may be well informed and
supportive enough of a cause to buy semipostals, regardless of how the
stamp looks or how the proceeds will be spent, many other potential
consumers may need to be informed about the semipostal and may consider
these factors in their decision of whether to purchase a semipostal.
Support may be further enhanced if the semipostal or the available
promotional information clearly indicates how the money will be used. For
example, the Breast Cancer Research stamp provides a clear indication of
how proceeds will be used, while the fund-raising causes benefiting from
the Stop Family Violence stamp may not be as apparent.
o Semipostals generate proceeds immediately upon issuance, but the
logistics of using the moneys raised takes much longer. Uncertainty
surrounding the amount of funds that a semipostal will raise, together
with the amount of time required to establish new programs to distribute
semipostal funds can lead to a time lag before agencies use semipostal
proceeds. Using existing agency processes and procedures for grant
programs may ease administration and expedite the distribution of
semipostal proceeds. For example, DOD treats Breast Cancer Research stamp
proceeds the same as all other funds in its Breast Cancer Research
Program, which allowed the agency to incorporate the semipostal funds into
its regular grant cycle within a year. In contrast, FEMA, which is
developing a new program for administering Heroes of 2001 stamp proceeds,
has taken nearly 3 years to award any semipostal funds.
o A reporting approach, such as the one included in the Semipostal
Authorization Act, can enhance accountability. In the Semipostal
Authorization Act, Congress took steps to ensure that reporting on the use
of funds would be a part of any Service initiated semipostals. However,
the three existing semipostals were all authorized separately from this
act, and the agencies that receive proceeds from these semipostals are not
required to report on the use of the funds. Additionally, program
reporting is an important standard for ensuring accountability of
charitable proceeds, and for the semipostal causes, many advocacy groups
were unclear as to specifically how semipostal proceeds were being used.
In the case of the Stop Family Violence stamp, this resulted in reduced
support for the stamp by advocacy groups. Reporting can make information
about grant goals and accomplishments more transparent.
We are recommending that the agencies receiving semipostal proceeds
improve reporting of how the funds are being used by issuing annual
reports to the congressional committees with jurisdiction over the
Service. In commenting on a draft of this report, the Service generally
agreed with the four key factors that appear to affect semipostal sales
but suggested that stamp design and its promotion of the stamps seem to be
of less importance to a semipostal's success as a fund-raiser. We continue
to believe that stamp design and the Service's promotional efforts were
key factors in semipostal sales, based on our discussion with advocacy
groups and fund-raising experts. For example, fund-raising experts agreed
that in most cases there is a connection between the amount invested and
the amounts raised. DOD concurred with our recommendation to improve
reporting of how semipostal proceeds are used.
Background The three stamps issued thus far in the nation's semipostal
program have all been authorized through separate congressional acts
pertaining solely to those stamps. The Stamp Out Breast Cancer Act
required that the Service issue a Breast Cancer Research stamp, the
nation's first semipostal. Two additional semipostals-the Heroes of 2001
and Stop Family Violence stamps-were mandated by Congress in the 9/11
Heroes Stamp Act of 2001 and the Stamp Out Domestic Violence Act of 2001.7
Figure 2 shows the three semipostals.
7Both acts were included as part of the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2002 (P.L. 107-67).
Figure 2: Breast Cancer Research, Heroes of 2001, and Stop Family Violence
Stamps
Source: U.S. Postal Service.
Following the authorization of these semipostals by Congress, a number of
stakeholders became involved with the semipostals, including the Service,
designated federal agencies, and advocacy groups. For example, after
Congress mandated the semipostals, the Service issued the stamps and then
transferred semipostal proceeds to the designated federal agencies, which
then directed the funds toward the identified causes. Additionally,
advocacy groups involved with the charitable causes have assisted in
promoting the semipostals. Table 1 identifies the various stakeholders and
summarizes their primary roles related to the semipostals.
Table 1: Semipostal Stakeholders and Related Roles Stakeholder Role
Postal Service Establish the postage rate for semipostals, make
semipostals available to the public, deduct reasonable costs from
semipostal proceeds, and transfer the remaining funds to designated
federal agencies.
Designated agencies Administer the semipostal proceeds contributed to the
designated charitable cause.
Advocacy groups No official role, but various groups have individually
participated in promoting semipostals.
Source: GAO analysis of information provided by the U.S. Postal Service
and agencies.
Authorized for 2 years in 1998, the Breast Cancer Research stamp has
subsequently been reauthorized three times, and there are proposals in
Congress to further extend the sales period through December 31, 2007. The
Breast Cancer Research stamp raises money for breast cancer research
programs at NIH and DOD, with the former receiving 70 percent of the funds
raised and the latter receiving the remaining 30 percent. The Heroes of
2001 stamp was offered for sale from June 7, 2002, to December 31, 2004,
and funds raised were transferred to FEMA to provide assistance to the
families of emergency relief personnel who were killed or permanently
disabled in the line of duty in connection with the terrorist attacks
against the United States on September 11, 2001. The Service started
selling the Stop Family Violence stamp on October 8, 2003, and it is
scheduled to expire on December 31, 2006. Proceeds from the Stop Family
Violence stamp are being transferred to HHS for domestic violence
programs. For a period of just over 1 year, between October 8, 2003, and
December 31, 2004, all three semipostals were on sale simultaneously.
Figure 3 shows the authorized sales periods for each of the semipostals.
Figure 3: Authorized Sales Period of the Three Semipostals Authorized
sales period for the semipostals
7.5 years
Breast Cancer Research July 1998 - December 2005
Heroes of 2001 June 2002 - December 2004
Stop Family Violence October 2003 - December 2006 (future)
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Source: U.S. Postal Service.
Separately from the provisions that authorized the three semipostals, the
Semipostal Authorization Act gave the Service the authority to issue
semipostals that it considers to be appropriate and in the national public
interest; however, the Service has not yet exercised this authority.
Further, the Service has indicated that it does not plan to issue any
semipostals under its own authority until sales of the Breast Cancer
Research stamp and other congressionally authorized semipostals have
concluded. However, legislative proposals to establish new semipostals
continue to be made. In the 109th Congress, for example, a bill has been
introduced to establish a new semipostal to benefit the Peace Corps.8 In
February 2005, the House Committee on Government Reform, the oversight
committee for the Service, adopted a rule that stated that the Committee
will not give consideration to legislative proposals specifying the
subject matter of new semipostals. That rule also stated that the Service
should determine the subject matter of new semipostals. In September 2005,
a bill was introduced to establish a semipostal to provide disaster relief
for residents of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama who were affected by
Hurricane Katrina. The proceeds are to be transferred to the American Red
Cross Disaster Relief Fund for Hurricane Katrina, which is not a
government entity. This contrasts with the existing semipostals that
transfer their proceeds to designated federal agencies.9
In our previous work, we reported that the Breast Cancer Research stamp
has been an effective fund-raiser and that funds raised through sales of
the stamp had contributed to key insights and approaches for the treatment
of breast cancer. Most of the key stakeholders we spoke with and,
according to our survey, members of the public viewed the stamp as an
appropriate way of raising funds for a nonpostal purpose. We expressed
some concerns, however, about the Service's identification and recovery of
costs associated with carrying out the act. We recommended that the
Service reexamine and, as necessary, revise its Breast Cancer Research
stamp costrecovery regulations. We also suggested that Congress consider
establishing annual reporting requirements for NIH and DOD.
8H.R. 560 was introduced on February 2, 2005. 9H.R. 3750 was introduced on
Septembert 13, 2005.
Semipostals Have Semipostals have raised over $56 million to date, and
sales were likely
impacted by several factors. In addition to variations in the amounts
raisedRaised Over $56 by each of the semipostals, sales patterns were also
different, and on the Million, with Several basis of our discussions with
Service officials, advocacy groups, and other Factors Likely stakeholders,
we identified four key factors that affected sales, including
(1) fund-raising cause, (2) support of advocacy groups, (3) stamp
design,Affecting Sales and (4) Service promotional activities.
Semipostal Proceeds and Sales Patterns Varied Substantially
The funds raised by the semipostals vary from $44 million for the Breast
Cancer Research stamp to over $10.5 million for the Heroes of 2001 stamp
and nearly $2 million for the Stop Family Violence stamp, totaling over
$56 million. The length of time that each semipostal has been sold
affected the amounts raised: the Breast Cancer Research stamp has been
available for 7 years, the Heroes of 2001 stamp was available for just
over 2 1/2 years, and the Stop Family Violence stamp has been available
for under 2 years.
Semipostal sales patterns reveal marked differences. Breast Cancer
Research stamp sales have fluctuated since the semipostal's issuance in
1998 but have remained at a comparably high level over time (see fig. 4).
The Heroes of 2001 and Stop Family Violence stamps each had initial sales
surges-although at much different levels-with subsequent declines. Sales
of the Breast Cancer Research stamp have averaged over 22 million
semipostals per quarter since it was issued in 1998, with total sales of
606.8 million semipostals by May 31, 2005.10 Sales of the Heroes of 2001
stamp averaged over 13 million semipostals per quarter throughout its
sales period and totaled 132.9 million, although over 50 percent of total
sales occurred in the first two-quarters after issuance in 2002. Finally,
as of May 31, 2005, sales of the Stop Family Violence stamp have averaged
over 4 million semipostals per quarter and total 25.3 million since
issuance.
10For purposes of analyzing semipostal sales over time, we used the
Service's fiscal calendar.
Figure 4: Number of Semipostals Sold by Quarter, in Millions, through May 31,
2005
Number of semipostals sold in millions 50
Public awareness about the fund-raising causes represented by the
semipostals likely affected sales levels. The two semipostals addressing
causes with high levels of public awareness-finding a cure for breast
cancer and supporting the families of September 11 emergency personnel-had
higher sales than the Stop Family Violence stamp, which raises funds for
domestic violence programs, a cause that, while well known, has a lower
profile. An official with the Komen Foundation pointed out that in the
case of the Breast Cancer Research stamp, the fact that about one in eight
women are affected by breast cancer keeps the subject in the public
spotlight. Likewise, the national significance of the events surrounding
the September 11 terrorist attacks ensured a high level of public
awareness regarding the cause represented by the Heroes of 2001
40
30
20
10 0 Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2 1998 1999 2000 2001
2002 2003 2004 2005 Year
Breast Cancer Research
Heroes of 2001
Stop Family Violence
Source: U.S. Postal Service.
Sales Patterns Were Influenced by Several Key Factors
Fund-Raising Cause: Awareness, Appeal, and Staying Power
stamp. In contrast, Service officials pointed to the lack of general
coverage about domestic violence, which may have limited sales of the Stop
Family Violence stamp.
The appeal of the particular fund-raising cause was also a factor
affecting semipostal sales. While the Breast Cancer Research and Heroes of
2001 stamps were associated with causes that generate a strong and
supportive response, the Stop Family Violence stamp deals with a cause
that may evoke a more complex response. Officials with the Association of
Fundraising Professionals noted that certain causes generate a greater
response than others, regardless of fund-raising methods. According to an
official with the BBB Wise Giving Alliance, for example, four popular
fundraising causes currently are cancer, children's issues, relief
efforts, and animals, although the popularity of fund-raising causes
fluctuates over time. Such an impact can be particularly acute for
campaigns that use affinity fund-raising, whereby donors demonstrate their
support for a specific cause with a public sign of their commitment.
Fund-raising experts we spoke with at the Association of Fundraising
Professionals stated that semipostals are examples of this kind of effort,
and officials with the American Red Cross noted that other well-known
examples of such marketing include the Lance Armstrong Foundation's
LiveStrong yellow bracelets and pink breast cancer awareness ribbons. Such
branding can be problematic, however, for causes that, for a variety of
reasons, may be more difficult to embrace. For example, officials with the
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence and the Service mentioned
that consumers may be reluctant to use the Stop Family Violence stamp
given that the fund-raising cause is particularly sensitive. Service
officials noted that some consumers pay close attention to the ways in
which stamps can send intended or unintended messages about the sender or
receiver of letters.
The difference in appeal between fund-raising causes can also be seen in
the degree to which they readily attract support or promotion by
businesses or organizations. In the case of the semipostals, American
Express and NASCAR approached the Service about partnership promotions for
the Breast Cancer Research and Heroes of 2001 stamps, respectively. The
partnerships resulted in promotion for the semipostals, done largely at
the expense of the Service's partners, who were able to affiliate
themselves with these popular causes. American Express advertised the
Breast Cancer Research stamp in print and inserts, while NASCAR placed an
image of the Heroes of 2001 stamp prominently on a stock car at very
little cost to the Service (see fig. 5). The Service did not
receive any comparable offers in support of the Stop Family Violence
stamp.
Figure 5: Heroes of 2001 Stamp Featured on NASCAR Busch Series
Professional Stock Car
Source: Brewco Motorsports, Inc.
While awareness and appeal may affect the size of the response, the length
of the response may be related to another characteristic: whether the
fundraising cause is for an episodic event, such as a disaster, or for an
ongoing concern, such as finding a cure for a disease. The Heroes of 2001
stamp sales reflected the dramatic emotional spike typically associated
with episodic events, with fund-raising efforts building quickly and then
declining as events begin to retreat from the public spotlight or become
affected by subsequent developments, according to officials with the
American Red Cross and the BBB Wise Giving Alliance. These organizations
pointed to the fund-raising efforts generated by the December 2004 tsunami
as an example of another episodic event, noting that the tsunami
fund-raising surge lasted about 30 days. Officials with the Association of
Fundraising Professionals told us that such fund-raising spikes are common
for one-time events. More specifically, many September 11 fund-raising
efforts experienced the same initial surge and the subsequent decline that
the Heroes of 2001 stamp experienced, according to representatives with
the New York City Police Foundation, the September 11th Families
Association, and the National Association of Fallen Firefighters. By
contrast, ongoing causes, such as finding a cure for breast cancer, are
more likely to have staying power over time, according to fund-raising
experts.
Advocacy Groups: Capacity and Activities Undertaken
Sales of the semipostals were likely affected by the capacity of advocacy
groups working to promote them. Several of the breast cancer advocacy
groups supporting the Breast Cancer Research stamp have large networks of
members and have promoted the semipostal at events involving thousands of
participants. For example, the Komen Foundation, an active supporter of
the semipostal, has more than 80,000 individuals in an online advocacy
group involved in lobbying to extend sale of the semipostal. The
foundation also conducts "Race for the Cure" events around the world, with
more than 1 million walkers or runners participating each year since 2000;
and a partnership effort between the Komen Foundation and Yoplait (and its
parent company General Mills) has contributed over $14 million to the
breast cancer cause over 7 years. In contrast, family violence prevention
groups tend to be smaller, according to officials with the Association of
Fundraising Professionals. The National Resource Center on Domestic
Violence noted that it has a mailing list of about 5,000 to which it has
sent information about the Stop Family Violence stamp; and another group,
the National Domestic Violence Hotline, provided information about the
semipostal to over 100 local domestic violence programs. Further, an
official with the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence described a
cell phone donation program that earned about $2 million over 6 or 7
years. Finally, Service officials noted that there were no organized
groups to coordinate with when the Heroes of 2001 stamp was developed.
Beyond the capacity of advocacy groups, the specific efforts undertaken in
support of the semipostals by such groups over time likely affected sales.
Several breast cancer advocacy groups have actively supported the Breast
Cancer Research stamp since its issuance, while comparatively less was
done by advocacy groups to support the Heroes of 2001 or Stop Family
Violence stamps, which may account for their declining sales trends.
Service officials link semipostal sales to the support of advocacy groups.
o Several breast cancer advocacy groups that we spoke with mentioned
carrying on activities to promote the Breast Cancer Research stamp. (Table
2 provides examples of these activities.) Likewise, Service officials
stated that grassroots support given to the Breast Cancer Research stamp
helps to explain its long-term success, pointing to the organized support
of the semipostal by breast cancer advocacy groups and individuals, which
has included use by doctors' offices, sponsored walks and runs, and
activities surrounding Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
Table 2: Examples of Promotional Efforts Undertaken by Breast Cancer
Advocacy Groups to Support the Breast Cancer Research Stamp
Breast cancer advocate Promotional effort
Cure Breast Cancer Dr. Ernie Bodai, CEO of Cure Breast Cancer, Inc.,
presented the stamp in San Francisco with Senator Feinstein and other
activists in July 2000. He has also had numerous speaking engagements on
behalf of the Breast Cancer Research stamp and been featured in articles
for magazines such as Glamour and Women's Day.
Susan G. Komen Breast Hundreds of Race for the Cure events have partnered
with
Cancer Foundation local post offices to promote the Breast Cancer Research
stamp. The stamp was also featured at the 1998 Washington, D.C. race, at
which Vice President Gore was a guest speaker.
Women's Information Women's Information Network Against Breast Cancer (WIN
Network Against Breast ABC) President Betsy Mullen threw out the first
pitch at a Cancer San Diego Padres baseball game as the Breast Cancer
Research stamp image was projected on the field. WIN ABC is currently
coordinating with the National Needle Arts Association for the Stitch to
Win Program to create five wall hangings of the Breast Cancer Research
stamp in a project
a
traveling around the country.
Source: GAO presentation of information provided by breast cancer advocacy
groups and the U.S. Postal Service.
aDr. Bodai is credited with conceiving the idea for the Breast Cancer
Research stamp. He and Ms. Mullen lobbied Congress for the Breast Cancer
Research stamp originally. See appendix III for additional information
about how the stamp was developed.
o None of the advocacy groups affiliated with emergency personnel
affected by the terrorist attacks of September 11 that we spoke with
regarding the Heroes of 2001 stamp had engaged in promotional activities
for the semipostal. The advocacy groups we spoke with were aware that the
funds raised through sales of the semipostal were to be directed to
September 11 emergency responders in some capacity, but they were unaware
of the specifics of how the proceeds would be used. Like the Stop Family
Violence stamp, sales of the Heroes of 2001 stamp did not have the boosts
in sales seen periodically with the Breast Cancer Research stamp, although
its initial sales were higher. The semipostal's limited staying power may
have reflected the lack of advocacy group activity on behalf of the
semipostal.
o Several domestic and family violence advocacy groups mentioned that
while they had intended to support the Stop Family Violence stamp with
promotional activities, they have done less than originally planned.
Confusion about how Stop Family Violence stamp proceeds would be
used led some domestic and family violence advocacy groups to limit their
promotional activities on behalf of the semipostal. As a result, although
some local advocacy groups carried out promotional activities with local
post offices, such as semipostal unveiling ceremonies, the national
domestic or family violence groups that we spoke with typically limited
their promotional activities to articles in newsletters or features on
group Web sites. Some domestic and family violence advocacy groups
acknowledged that they could have done more to promote the Stop Family
Violence stamp and that the semipostal's sales were likely adversely
affected by this lack of promotion.
Stamp Design: Image and The designs of both the Breast Cancer Research and
Heroes of 2001 stamps
Message Clarity
were lauded by stakeholders; however, there was concern that the design of
the Stop Family Violence stamp may have negatively affected sales of that
semipostal. Both the Breast Cancer Research and Heroes of 2001 stamps had
designs that were praised by stakeholders as having inspiring images that
conveyed some information about where proceeds would be directed.
Consumers could assume that funds would go to breast cancer research or
September 11 emergency personnel in some capacity, according to officials
with the American Red Cross. However, officials with the Association of
Fundraising Professionals noted that the exact use of the funds was not
clearly spelled out on either semipostal. Further, in-store messaging also
provided limited information. (See fig. 6 for an example of an in-store
counter card featuring the semipostals.) In contrast, although the design
of the Stop Family Violence stamp won an international award,11 and the
story behind the design was described as inspiring by some advocacy
groups,12 advocates with such organizations as the Family Violence
Prevention Fund and the National Network to End Domestic Violence
questioned how likely postal customers would be to buy the stamp to use on
their mail, given the image of a crying child. In addition, the
semipostal's design and information provided by the Service on in-store
11The Stop Family Violence stamp was chosen by an international jury at
the 34th Asiago International Prize for Philatelic Art as the most
beautiful social awareness-themed stamp issued during 2003. The award was
announced under the High Patronage of the President of the Republic of
Italy.
12See appendix III for information about each of the semipostal designs.
materials are less clear regarding how semipostal proceeds are to be
used,referring to both domestic and family violence, which are viewed by
some as separate causes.13
13The Family Violence Prevention and Services Act defines family violence
as any act or threatened act of violence, including any forceful detention
of an individual, which results or threatens to result in physical injury;
and is committed by a person against another individual (including an
elderly person) to whom such person is or was related by blood or marriage
or otherwise legally related or with whom such person was lawfully
residing. Advocacy groups we spoke with defined domestic violence as
violence committed by an intimate partner against another intimate partner
(i.e., spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend, or past partner), noting that
family violence may not include those without a legal family relationship.
Figure 6: Service Counter Card Showing the Semipostals and Information
about How Proceeds Would Be Used
Source: U.S. Postal Service.
The Service's Promotional Both the Breast Cancer Research and Heroes of
2001 stamps had extensive Efforts Service advertising campaigns. The
Service spent nearly $900,000 to
advertise the Breast Cancer Research stamp and more than $1.1 million for
the Heroes of 2001 stamp. This advertising included a billboard in Times
Square for the Breast Cancer Research stamp and a national print
advertising campaign for the Heroes of 2001 stamp. The Service also
received the Gold "Reggie" award from the Promotion Marketing Association
for the Service's efforts in promoting the Breast Cancer Research stamp.14
As the result of an overall reduction in the Service's budget, advertising
for all stamps, including semipostals, has been limited to in-store
messaging since 2003. As a consequence, Service officials determined that
all funds spent to advertise semipostals would be deducted from the totals
raised through their sales. This policy change had a marked impact on
promotional activities for the Stop Family Violence stamp, which was
issued in October 2003. While advertising costs associated with the Breast
Cancer Research and Heroes of 2001 stamps had been paid by the Service,
all advertising costs for the Stop Family Violence stamp were to be
deducted from the stamp's proceeds. In light of these limitations, the
Service met with HHS before the Stop Family Violence stamp was issued. At
this meeting the Service proposed spending $1.5 million or more on an
advertising campaign that would be funded by the future semipostal
proceeds. Because of uncertainty about how much money would be raised
through sales of the Stop Family Violence stamp, HHS decided that the
proposed advertising campaign not be pursued. In lieu of such a campaign,
the Service and HHS looked to the advocacy groups to promote the
semipostal. The Service and HHS officials met with advocacy group
representatives and provided them with examples of the types of
promotional activities that breast cancer advocacy groups had done to help
publicize the Breast Cancer Research stamp and a poster for use in
promotional activities. Through March 31, 2005, the Service spent about
$77,000 to advertise the Stop Family Violence stamp, and this amount was
recovered from semipostal proceeds. Table 3 provides examples of Service
promotional efforts and partnerships in support of the semipostals.
14According to the Promotion Marketing Association, the Reggie awards-with
a name derived from "cash register"-identify and honor the best
promotional programs each year. The Service received a Reggie for its
Breast Cancer stamp promotional campaign in 1999.
Table 3: Examples of Service National Advertising, Promotional, and
Partnership Efforts in Support of the Semipostals
National advertising, promotional, and partnership Semipostal effort
Breast Cancer Research Stamp unveiled at the 1998 Revlon Run/Walk for
Women in
stamp Los Angeles. Additional promotion carried out at Revlon Run/Walk
events in New York and Los Angeles in 1999.
Times Square billboard showed the Breast Cancer Research stamp image and
the slogan "Help stamp out Breast Cancer!"
National newspaper and magazine advertising campaign in USA Weekend,
Reader's Digest, Better Homes and Gardens, Southern Living, Parade, TV
Guide and People.
Partnership promotion with American Express at five Women's National
Basketball Association (WNBA) games in 1998.
In 2003, the Safeway supermarket chain purchased more than $1 million of
Breast Cancer Research stamps as part of its community caring program. In
addition to the more than $180,000 this purchase represented in stamp
proceeds, Safeway sold sheets of 20 stamps, normally priced at $9, for $10
with the extra dollar going to local breast cancer research.
Heroes of 2001 stamp National print advertising campaign included USA
Today and additional advertising in the New York area included the New
York Times.
Displayed on a stock car at an inaugural NASCAR event at the Daytona
International Speedway in 2002.
Stop Family Violence Advertisements for the Stop Family Violence stamp
stamp appeared in individual issues of Parent's and The Week magazines at
no charge to the Service.
Source: GAO presentation of information provided by the U.S. Postal
Service.
Service officials said that differences in sales among the three
semipostals were not the result of the level of actions on the part of the
Service. They said a semipostal's success is dependent on the support
provided by external groups or individuals. Service officials point out
that for each semipostal, the Service issued a field and press kit and met
with officials from the agencies receiving semipostal proceeds. In
addition, the Service initiated kickoff events for each of the semipostals
at the White House, with involvement from either the President or First
Lady (see fig. 7). Finally, Service officials noted that local post
offices are available to sponsor local events at the discretion of the
postmaster. For example, the Service's South Georgia District employees
established the "Circle of Hope"
campaign to promote and raise funds for the Breast Cancer Research stamp.
In 2004, the campaign raised an estimated $21,000 in proceeds through
stamp sales. Likewise, the Cardiss Collins Postal Facility in Chicago held
a rededication ceremony for the Stop Family Violence stamp on August 2,
2005, in collaboration with the Illinois Secretary of State and officials
from the Chicago Abused Women Coalition and the Chicago Police Department.
Figure 7: Photos of White House Kickoff Events for Each of the Semipostals
Sources: U.S. Postal Service, White House.
The Breast Cancer Research stamp was President Bush unveiled the Heroes of
2001 stamp
officially issued by former First Lady Hillary with Postmaster General
Jack Potter; Firefighters Billy
Rodham Clinton and former Postmaster Eisengrein and George Johnson; U.S.
Rep. Gary
General William Henderson at the White Ackerman; Firefighter Dan
McWilliams; and
House. photographer Thomas Franklin, who took the photo
featured on the stamp.
After signing a proclamation recognizing October as Domestic Violence
Month, President George W. Bush shakes hands with Monique Blais, 7, the
young artist who designed the Stop Family Violence stamp.
Semipostal Proceeds The federal agencies receiving semipostal proceeds
currently award or
plan to award these funds using grants, and although each agency hasWill
Be Used for collected and maintained information on semipostal proceeds,
none has Grants, with Limited reported specifically on their use of
proceeds thus far. NIH and DOD use Reporting on Specific Breast Cancer
Research stamp proceeds to award research grants under
existing programs. HHS has not distributed any proceeds from the StopUses
Family Violence stamp, but officials reported that they have established
new grants within an existing program to award grants for domestic
violence programs. While the other semipostals address ongoing causes, the
Heroes of 2001 stamp raised funds for an episodic event without an
established mechanism for distributing such funds. As a result, FEMA is
establishing a new program and accompanying regulations for distributing
Heroes of 2001 stamp proceeds to families of emergency relief personnel
who were killed or permanently disabled in the line of duty in connection
with the September 11 terrorist attacks. The laws authorizing these three
specific semipostals do not include reporting requirements such as those
of the Semipostal Authorization Act. Of the four agencies, FEMA and HHS
have plans to report specifically as to the use of semipostal proceeds.
Breast Cancer Research Stamp and Stop Family Violence Stamp Proceeds Are
Used for Grants within Established Programs
NIH and DOD: Grants for Breast Cancer Research Under Way
Both NIH and DOD reported that they began receiving Breast Cancer Research
stamp proceeds from the Service in November 1998, and breast cancer
research grants have been awarded using established programs at both
agencies since June 2000 and June 1999, respectively.15 NIH initially
directed these proceeds to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) to award
high-risk research grants through the "Insight Awards to Stamp Out Breast
Cancer" initiative.16 This initiative was specifically designed for the
Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds, but exists within NCI's grants
program. One example of these grants includes funding research related to
the development of a potential antitumor drug. In 2003, NIH approved new
Breast Cancer Research stamp grants through the "Exceptional Opportunities
in Breast Cancer Research" initiative, also administered by NCI, which
uses semipostal proceeds to fund more traditional research. According to
NIH officials, this change was made when it was determined that there were
highly meritorious research applications outside the
15Upon receiving the proceeds from the Service, these funds were
incorporated into NIH and DOD's normal grant cycles.
16High-risk research refers to research that does not require extensive
preliminary data and includes the exploration and testing of novel ideas
and approaches.
funding ability of NCI, and they noted that many outstanding grant
applications would remain unfunded without the use of semipostal proceeds.
Exceptional Opportunities awards have covered breast cancer research areas
that include prevention, diagnosis, biology, and treatment. DOD uses
Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds to fund innovative approaches to
breast cancer research through "Idea Award" grants under its existing
Breast Cancer Research Program, which is administered by the U.S. Army
Medical Research and Materiel Command. The scope of the grants has not
changed since DOD began awarding them in 1999. Table 4 contains additional
information about these initiatives and the size and number of grants
awarded with Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds.
Table 4: NIH and DOD Grants Using Breast Cancer Research Stamp Proceeds
Grant Number of grants awarded Agency (award years) Grant mission and
amounts Grant selection and evaluation
NIH Insight Awards to Stamp-Out Breast Cancer (2000-2002) Fund high-risk
exploration by scientists employed outside the federal government who
conduct research at their own institutions. Awarded for a 2-year period.
Awarded 86 Insight Awards that totaled about $9.5 million and averaged
$111,242. Most Insight Awards were for a 2-year period, and NIH
distributed the last Insight Awards in 2002. Program announcements are
released through the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts and NCI's Web
site. Grant applications undergo two levels of peer review that evaluate
scientific and technical merit.
Grants are monitored annually and are given a final review at their
conclusion. Criteria used to measure progress include publications and
patent filings.
Exceptional Fund well-established NIH has awarded 20 (Same as above)
Opportunities in research that would not Exceptional Opportunities
Breast Cancer have been funded Awards that total about $6.6
Research otherwise. Awarded for a million. Individual awards
(2003-present) maximum of 4 years. averaged $330,763.
DOD Idea Awards Fund innovative high-DOD has awarded 27 Idea
(1999-present) risk/high-return Awards using Breast Cancer research.
Research stamp proceeds at a total of about $11 million, and grants have
averaged $400,405.
Program announcements are posted online. Applications undergo two tiers of
review. The first tier is peer review that evaluates technical and
scientific merit. The second tier is programmatic review that compares
applications to each other.
Grants are monitored annually. Criteria used to measure progress include
publications, presentations, patents, and products.
Source: GAO presentation of information provided by NIH and DOD.
Since NIH and DOD both apply Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds to
established grant programs the agencies used existing procedures and
regulations for awarding grants funded with the proceeds. For example,
both agencies use existing review procedures to evaluate grant
applications with input from advocacy groups. NIH and DOD officials stated
that advocacy groups play an important role, and both agencies involve
advocacy groups in their grants processes.
Grants funded by NIH and DOD using Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds
have produced significant findings in breast cancer research. The first
NIH Exceptional Opportunities Awards funded with Breast Cancer Research
stamp proceeds were distributed in fiscal year 2003 and are awarded for a
maximum of 4 years; therefore, it is still too early to report results
from these awards. Both NIH and DOD use existing programs and processes
such as monitoring grantees and requiring annual grantee reporting, which
has made measuring grant performance and tracking grant outcomes
relatively straightforward. Officials at each agency were pleased to gain
new sources of funding and pleased that there have been some significant
findings in the field of breast cancer research resulting from these
awards. Table 5 provides select examples of research findings from NIH
Insight Awards and DOD Idea Awards funded with Breast Cancer Research
stamp proceeds.
Table 5: Select Research Findings from NIH and DOD Grants Funded with
Breast Cancer Research Stamp Proceeds
Agency Principal investigator and institution Research finding
NIH James A. Bennett, Ph.D. A new chemically engineered synthetic peptide
that, in animal studies,
Insight Awards Albany Medical College
appears to be effective against certain tumors. It has potential alone or
in combination as an antitumor drug.
Felix R. Fernandez-Madrid, M.D., Ph.D. Part of the difficulty in both the
diagnosis and treatment of cancer is
Wayne State University identifying surface molecules unique to the
transformed or cancer cell. Through the methodical screening of 1,300
breast cancer sera, this research has resulted in the identification of 12
new proteins not previously identified as autoantigens of breast cancer.
Autoantigens represent important targets because the body has elicited an
immune response, suggesting that there is some aspect of the tumor
recognized as foreign by the body. This has broad implications both in
research into the biology of the tumor as well as its diagnosis.
Stephen Byers, Ph.D. A certain gene has proved to be a clinically
important in the
Georgetown University identification of colon cancer. This research has
demonstrated that a related gene family member is deleted in many breast
and ovarian cancers. This would classify it as a new tumor suppressor
gene. The research team is currently developing an assay to detect this
alteration for use in breast and ovarian cancer prognosis.
DOD Kermit Carraway, Ph.D. This research led to the discovery of
a new molecule that inhibits the
Idea Awards University of activity of epidermal growth factor, a
California molecule that encourages cell
growth. This molecule has potential as
a new form of therapeutic agent.
The research studied a protein called
Roger Daly, Ph.D. cortactin that seems to be
Garvan Institute involved in the growth and spread of
cancer cells. Dr. Daly has applied
for patents on work involving protein
complexes comprising cortactin
and their uses.
Development of imaging techniques to
Lihong Wang, Ph.D. detect breast cancer early
Texas A&M University without the use of ionizing radiation
(which is used in mammography).
Dr. Wang has applied for patents on
this technology, and clinical testing
of this imaging method has begun.
Source: GAO presentation of information provided by NCI, NIH, and the U.S.
Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, DOD.
HHS: Grants Planned for HHS began receiving Stop Family Violence stamp
proceeds from the Domestic Violence Programs Service in May 2004, and, as
of July 2005, HHS has not yet awarded any Aimed at Children's Services
grants using semipostal proceeds.17 HHS is using an established grant
program, the Family Violence and Prevention Services Program, to make the
proceeds available at the end of fiscal year 2005 for grants aimed at
enhancing services to children exposed to domestic violence. As of June
30, 2005, the Service had transferred about $1.8 million to HHS, and the
17HHS officials indicated that the program announcement for the grants was
undergoing internal review during this period and would be announced with
other discretionary programs in the spring of 2005.
agency has directed these proceeds to ACF, which is responsible for
distributing the funds. In June 2005, ACF released an announcement for the
grants, and ACF officials stated that they expect the first grants to be
awarded during the end of fiscal year 2005. The purpose of the grants is
to provide enhanced services and support to children who have been exposed
to domestic violence in order to mitigate the impact of such exposure and
increase the opportunities for these children to lead healthy lives as
adults. Grant applicants are required to collaborate with a state's
domestic violence coalition and the state agency responsible for
administering family violence programs. According to agency officials, it
has always been ACF's intention to use Stop Family Violence proceeds for
enhanced services to children. Table 6 provides additional information
about the ACF grants, to be awared including the size and number of
awards.
Table 6: ACF Grants Using Stop Family Violence Stamp Proceeds
Number of grants and Agency Grant Grant mission amounts Grant selection
and evaluation
ACF Demonstration of Enhanced Services to Children and Youth Who Have Been
Exposed to Domestic Violence To provide enhanced services and support to
children and youth exposed to domestic violence in order to mitigate the
impact of that exposure and increase the opportunity of these children and
youth to lead healthy, nonviolent, and safe lives as adults. ACF
anticipates awarding four to five grants with a maximum amount of $130,000
per budget period.
These grants will be awarded to organizations that plan to provide the
services through collaboration with a state domestic violence coalition
and the state agency responsible for administering family violence
prevention programs and services.
Grant announcements are released through ACF's Web site and
http://www.grants.gov, an online repository of federal grant opportunities
managed by HHS.
Grant applications are evaluated on a weighted set of criteria made
available to applicants in the program announcement.
Grantees are monitored semiannually through required progress and
financial reports and are given a final review once the grant project is
completed. Grantees are required to state how they will determine the
extent to which the project has achieved its stated objectives and the
extent to which accomplishments can be attributed to the project.
Source: GAO presentation of information provided by ACF, HHS.
According to ACF officials, the agency used an established program to
develop its grants to award Stop Family Violence stamp proceeds. The
officials stated that ACF is using existing competitive review procedures
to evaluate grant applications. These review procedures are described in
the
grant announcement, which was developed through ACF's existing grant
application process and made available on ACF's Web site. ACF also plans
to use its existing project grant reporting system to monitor grantee
performance (see table 6). ACF consulted with domestic violence advocacy
groups, state agencies, and state domestic violence coalitions on the
current distribution of children's services offered by domestic violence
organizations and solicited their input on a fair and equitable method for
grant participation. Although ACF involved advocacy groups in developing
the way that semipostal funds could be used initially, many groups that we
spoke with in the spring of 2005 expressed concern about how the Stop
Family Violence stamp proceeds would be spent. Some national domestic
violence groups reported that they were unaware of ACF's intentions for
semipostal proceeds because no semipostal grants have been announced and
no funds had been spent.18
FEMA: New Program Being Developed to Distribute Heroes of 2001 Stamp
Proceeds
FEMA started receiving Heroes of 2001 stamp proceeds from the Service in
November 2002, and FEMA has not yet distributed any of the semipostal
proceeds. To determine the total amount of funds available, FEMA officials
stated that the agency made a decision to wait until the Service had
transferred all semipostal proceeds-in May 2005-before finalizing its
grants program. Following the final transfer, FEMA had received over $10.5
million in semipostal proceeds. FEMA is establishing a program to make
grants available to eligible emergency relief personnel who are
permanently disabled or to the families of emergency relief personnel who
were killed as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11.
According to FEMA officials, while distributing funds to disaster victims
is within the scope of FEMA's mission, distributing the semipostal
proceeds is not within the scope of its disaster authority. As a result,
FEMA has had to establish a new program with new regulations for
semipostal proceeds, which includes establishing the mechanism through
which the funds would be distributed. After undergoing regulatory review
at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), FEMA's interim rule for
their assistance program under the 9/11 Heroes Stamp Act of 2001 was made
publicly
18On June 8, 2005, ACF released an announcement for its grants utilizing
the Stop Family Violence stamp proceeds.
available on July 26, 2005.19 The interim rule states that FEMA intends to
distribute all Heroes of 2001 stamp proceeds equally among all eligible
claimants. Table 7 provides additional information about the FEMA grants.
Table 7: FEMA Grants Using Heroes of 2001 Stamp Proceeds
Number of grants and Agency Grant Grant mission amounts Grant selection
and evaluation
FEMA Assistance Program Under the 9/11 Heroes Stamp Act of 2001 To benefit
the families of emergency relief personnel who were killed or permanently
disabled while serving in the line of duty in connection with the
terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001. FEMA
estimates approximately 1,000 eligible claimants and will attempt to
distribute funds equally.
FEMA anticipates grants in the amount of approximately $10,000 for each
eligible claimant. Final amounts to be paid out to claimants will only be
determined after the total number of eligible claims filed has been
determined.
Applications are available from FEMA upon request. They can also be
downloaded from FEMA's Web site.
Eligible applicants include those who have been permanently physically
disabled in the line of duty, and personal representatives of emergency
relief personnel who were killed and in the line of duty, while serving at
the World Trade Center, Pentagon, or Shanksville, PA site in connection
with the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.
Source: GAO presentation of information provided by FEMA.
When designing its program and regulations, FEMA officials stated that the
agency considered the findings resulting from the Department of Justice
September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001, which provided over $7
billion in compensation to victims of the terrorist attacks. One of the
observations detailed in the Final Report of the Special Master for the
September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 is that there are serious
problems posed by a statutory approach mandating individualized awards for
each eligible claimant and that a better approach might be to provide the
same amount for all eligible claimants. Prior to publicizing its interim
rule, FEMA had informal discussions with stakeholder groups, and FEMA
officials also stated that the program regulation would be available for
public comment.20 New York City police, firefighter, and representatives
19FEMA reported that Executive Order 12866 requires that it follows this
rule-making process, including submission to OMB.
20The interim rule was released for 30 days of public comment on July 26,
2005.
of victims' foundations whom we spoke with expressed some concern
regarding FEMA's use of the proceeds, because they were unaware if FEMA
planned to allocate the Heroes of 2001 stamp proceeds through assistance
programs or grants to individual families. These groups also noted that
since the September 11 terrorist attacks, there has been an evolving set
of needs that have little funding support, including long-term programs
such as counseling and health care for emergency relief personnel involved
in the September 11 recovery and clean-up efforts.
Agencies Have Not Reported Specifically on the Proceeds' Use
None of the designated federal agencies receiving semipostal proceeds is
required to issue a report to Congress detailing how these funds are used
or any accomplishments resulting from semipostal-funded grants. The
agencies would face such a reporting requirement if the three existing
semipostals had been authorized under the Semipostal Authorization Act.
Specifically, the act contains an accountability mechanism consisting of
annual reports to include (1) the total amount of funding received by the
agency, (2) an accounting of how proceeds were allocated or otherwise
used, and (3) a description of any significant advances or accomplishments
during the year that were funded-in whole or in part-with funds
received.21 However, the laws that created the three semipostals did not
specify any reporting requirements, and the agencies themselves have
decided to take varying actions in this regard.
o NIH and DOD do not report specifically on the use of semipostal
proceeds, though the agencies do collect information that, if necessary,
could be assembled for such a report. To help manage their respective
grant programs, NIH and DOD require award recipients to provide periodic
reports on research progress and any breakthroughs achieved. Research
findings from grants funded by Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds can
be found in some NIH publications, but the agency does not report
specifically on its use of these funds. DOD provides limited information
on its Idea Awards through annual reports on its Congressionally Directed
Medical Research Programs. This reporting is limited to the number of Idea
Awards and does not provide information on which awards are funded with
Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds.
2139 U.S.C. 416 note.
o ACF plans to monitor grantee performance and to report on its use of
semipostal proceeds through HHS' grants system and will make an additional
report available to Congress.
o Although FEMA initially indicated to us that the agency was not
required to report on its use of semipostal proceeds, FEMA recently
provided information to Congress-in part as a result of our work-on the
total proceeds received from the sales of the Heroes of 2001 stamp. FEMA
officials have indicated that once proceeds have been distributed, a
report will be provided to Congress on the status of the 9/11 Heroes Stamp
Act of 2001. According to FEMA officials, the report will summarize the
agency's Heroes of 2001 stamp program including information on its
development, the process undertaken, and who is receiving the semipostal
proceeds.
Various fund-raising organizations that we spoke with indicated that
program reporting is a useful accountability tool and may lead to greater
fund-raising success. For example, the BBB Wise Giving Alliance, a charity
watchdog group, recommends reporting requirements, in the form of annual
reports, for charitable organizations to ensure that representations to
the public are accurate, complete, and respectful. These reports should be
made available to all, on request, and should include the organization's
mission, a summary of the past year's accomplishments, and financial
information. Further, officials with the American Red Cross stated that
disclosure provides transparency, allowing consumers to determine if the
cause is the best use of their money, and Association of Fundraising
Professional officials noted that such reporting can even secure
additional support by encouraging more people to contribute to the effort.
Lessons Learned from Existing Semipostals
While many of the agency officials, fund-raising groups, and charitable
organizations that we contacted believe that the semipostals have been
good fund-raisers, nearly all of them also believe that there were lessons
learned. For the past several years, there have been multiple proposals
introduced in Congress to establish new semipostals. For example in the
108th Congress, proposals had been introduced for semipostals promoting
childhood literacy, the Peace Corps, and prevention of childhood drinking.
Each of these proposals expired in committee, and-so far-the Peace Corps
semipostal proposal has been reintroduced in the 109th Congress. Any
lessons learned from the existing semipostals may be especially relevant
for any future semipostals, whether congressionally mandated or
issued under the Service's authority. The lessons we identified from these
three semipostals related primarily to five areas:
o charitable cause selected,
o advocacy group support,
o promotional efforts,
o use of funds raised, and
o agency reporting.
Lesson Learned: The Charitable Cause Selected Can Greatly Affect the Arc
of the Fund-Raising Effort and Other Results Achieved
The existing semipostals have been issued for a minimum 2-year sales
period, and one-the Breast Cancer Research stamp-has been extended 3
times. The experience with the three existing semipostals indicates that
the particular nature of the charitable causes may be important in how
much money is raised, how long consumers continue to purchase the
semipostal, and other results achieved. Among these differences are the
following:
o One-time charitable causes, such as response to a major disaster, may
provide a substantial immediate response but may also have limited staying
power as ongoing fund-raisers. The Heroes of 2001 stamp was issued in
2002, while various national organizations were still raising funds for
victims of the families of emergency relief personnel killed or disabled
in the line of duty. Sales were highest for the initial twoquarters,
followed by a dramatic drop. By contrast, the Breast Cancer Research
stamp, which raises funds for an ongoing health issue, has had sales that
have remained at a high level over its entire sales period.
o Considering a cause's appeal in drawing affinity support is important
in setting fund-raising expectations. Some charitable causes are simply
less popular than others, and recognition of these differences can aid in
forming assumptions about how much money will be raised through semipostal
sales. For some consumers, applying a postage stamp serves as a symbol of
loyalty to a particular charitable cause; therefore, it can be anticipated
that the magnitude of a particular cause's base of support will be
reflected in semipostal sales. Association of Fundraising Professionals
officials noted that certain causes generate a greater response than
others, regardless of fund-raising methods. That is, breast cancer is a
pervasive and ongoing concern; the September 11 terrorist
attacks were a popular concern, but also an event likely to fade in
intensity over time; and family violence, while an ongoing concern, is
likely to engender less appeal. According to Association of Fundraising
Professionals officials, the amounts raised by each semipostal are
consistent with the popularity of the type of fund-raising cause
represented on the stamps.
o In some cases, a growth in cause awareness may be a success that
transcends the amount of money raised. In addition to raising funds, the
semipostal program provides an avenue for increased exposure for
particular charitable causes. While the amount of funds raised may not be
as high for some causes, there are additional benefits of having a
semipostal representing a particular cause visible and for sale in post
offices throughout the country. Organizations and individuals whom we
spoke with agreed that for all of the semipostals, heightened awareness of
the cause was one benefit of having a semipostal. One Breast Cancer
Research stamp supporter commented that the contribution that the
semipostal has made to breast cancer awareness is priceless and more
precious than the funds raised. Likewise an official from the National
Fallen Firefighters Foundation stated that the Heroes of 2001 stamp has
helped raise public awareness about the fire service.22
Lesson Learned: Early and Continued Involvement of Advocacy Groups Helps
to Sustain Semipostal Support
Support of advocacy groups is an important marketing device for
semipostals. American Red Cross and BBB Wise Giving Alliance officials
told us that advocacy groups are the most useful tool for getting the word
out about charitable causes and fund-raising efforts, and Service
officials agreed. Broad supportive networks of private organizations that
are willing and capable of assisting in local and national marketing help
sustain semipostal awareness and sales. Where it is not possible to do
aggressive private-sector style marketing, as is the case with
semipostals, advocacy groups can fill this gap. In the case of the Breast
Cancer Research stamp, for example, the Service no longer has a budget to
advertise stamps, which includes semipostals, but there are numerous
advocacy groups that publicize the Breast Cancer Research stamp on their
Web sites, at events they sponsor, and through letters to members and
legislators.
22The fire service is one of the emergency services, which deals with
fires, the other services address crime and injury.
To sustain support from advocacy groups, the Service must cultivate this
support, and the agency receiving the semipostal proceeds must sustain
this support. Organizations involved with charitable causes told us that
due to their multitude of priorities, if their input and support are not
solicited and they are not kept informed about issues related to the
relevant semipostal, including fund usage and program outcomes, group
support for the semipostal will wane. For example, several advocacy groups
associated with the domestic violence cause told us that immediately
following launch of the Stop Family Violence stamp there was uncertainty
as to how HHS was going to use the proceeds because the public
announcement at the stamp's kickoff event differed from the groups'
expectations. These advocacy groups told us that as a result of this
confusion, they did not aggressively promote the semipostal.
Lesson Learned: The Stamp Design, How Extensively It Is Promoted and
Information About the Use of Proceeds Can Greatly Affect the Extent to
Which Consumers Support the Semipostal
Semipostal design is one of the variables that can affect whether
consumers are willing to signal their support for a cause. We received
comments from numerous stakeholders, for example, that the design of the
Stop Family Violence stamp, while certainly drawing attention, may not
create a positive response-or affinity-because of its tone. A semipostal's
design can evoke emotion, and the emotional reaction to the image may be
important in a consumer's decision to purchase a semipostal and use it on
a letter to make a statement. For example, the Heroes of 2001 stamp
provided an image that was not only recognizable but inspiring. By
contrast, the image on the Stop Family Violence stamp may create a more
complex reaction, and result in a consumer's decision not to buy the
semipostal.
The extent of promotion and advertising of a semipostal can also greatly
affect sales. Fund-raising organizations that we spoke with agreed that in
most cases, there is a connection between the amount invested in a
fundraising effort and the amounts raised. Although a direct correlation
has not been determined, it should be noted that as a result of a Service
budget reduction, which eliminated stamp advertising, the Stop Family
Violence stamp did not benefit from a million-dollar promotional campaign
as the two other semipostals did, and sales have remained lower in
comparison for the stamp.
Support may be further enhanced if the semipostal or the available
marketing information clearly indicates how the proceeds will be used.
Transparency is critical to fund-raising efforts, and semipostals are no
exception. According to the BBB Wise Giving Alliance, one of the standards
for charity accountability is to clearly disclose how the charity benefits
from the sale of product or services. American Red Cross officials also
emphasized that providing this information to consumers is critical to
fundraising efforts like semipostals. We found widespread confusion among
advocacy groups about specifically how the Stop Family Violence stamp
proceeds would be used. Officials added that the disclosure of where
funding is to be directed is particularly important, given that consumers
are increasingly savvy, and people have become increasingly skeptical
about the distribution of charitable funds.
Lesson Learned: Semipostals Generate Revenues Immediately Upon Issuance,
but the Logistics of Using the Moneys Raised Takes Longer
The time lag between when funds are first raised and when they are
distributed can be considerable, depending on the type of program that the
agency implements for distributing semipostal proceeds. Semipostal sales
generate revenues immediately upon going on sale at post offices, and
semipostal revenues are distributed by the Service to designated agencies
biannually, after the Service's reasonable costs are deducted. However, it
can then take an additional 2 years, or longer, for the funds to be used.
For example, the Breast Cancer Research stamp, which was authorized in
August 1997, was first sold in July of 1998, and the initial grants
resulting from the proceeds were awarded by DOD in June of 1999 and by NIH
in June of 2000 (nearly 1 and 2 years after issuance); the Heroes of 2001
stamp was first sold in June of 2002, and the proceeds raised have not yet
been awarded by FEMA (3 years after the stamp was issued); and the Stop
Family Violence stamp was first available in October of 2003, and no funds
have yet been awarded by ACF (nearly 2 years after issuance).
When semipostals are used as a fund-raising vehicle, the time lag is a
consideration. Agencies awarding semipostal proceeds may need to consider
this time lag in deciding how to apply the funds, particularly for
episodic events that may involve a fund-raising surge and short-term or
evolving needs. For example, program and funding priorities may change
from the time that a semipostal is launched to the time proceeds are
actually distributed. This time lag can result in consumer skepticism of
or disagreement with the original program selection, resulting from
changing or new funding priorities. For example, FEMA's plan for
distributing the Heroes of 2001 stamp proceeds has taken about 3 years to
finalize, and while it is clear that the initial intent of the semipostal
was to "provide financial assistance to the families of emergency relief
personnel killed or permanently disabled in the terrorist attacks of
September 11," other organizations working with these families suggested
that currently, the
most prevalent needs of this group are programs and services directed at
addressing the long-term effects of the terrorist attacks.
The amounts raised by semipostals vary, and it is difficult to determine
how much money will be raised by semipostal sales. For example, FEMA and
ACF, which receive proceeds from the Heroes of 2001 and Stop Family
Violence stamps respectively, reported to us that they delayed spending in
these programs due to the uncertainty of how much money would be raised.
ACF officials told us they initially expected the Stop Family Violence
stamp to raise considerably more than it has. Once ACF officials realized
that the amounts raised may not be sufficient to cover the planned
programs, officials revisited their plans for the proceeds. Further, FEMA
waited until all semipostal proceeds were received from the Service before
pursuing its grant program. Due to the uncertainties surrounding how much
money will be raised by semipostals, establishing a program that will be
funded solely by semipostal proceeds may present challenges. In addition,
attaching funds to already established mechanisms, such as existing grant
guidelines or programs, may ease administration and allow for additional
flexibility. For example, both the Breast Cancer Research and Stop Family
Violence stamp proceeds are being used to distribute new grants within
existing programs, which has allowed the agencies to make grants available
using semipostal proceeds without developing and establishing the rules
and regulations for new programs.
Lesson Learned: A Reporting Approach, Such as the One Included in the
Semipostal Authorization Act, Can Enhance Accountability
Program reporting is an important standard for ensuring accountability. In
general, we found that organizations we spoke with were unclear as to how
semipostal proceeds were being used or would be used, and we found that
none knew of any outcomes resulting from these funds. The Semipostal
Authorization Act, which does not specifically apply to these three
existing semipostals, requires that the agencies receiving funds under the
act report to the congressional committees with jurisdiction over the
Service about the semipostal funds received and used. Fund-raising
organizations we spoke with, including the American Red Cross and the BBB
Wise Giving Alliance, also recommend such reporting, pointing to the need
to inform consumers about how proceeds have been used. Additionally,
annual reporting may make information about program goals, plans, or
funding mechanisms available to Congress, advocacy groups, and others
earlier, thereby addressing some of the uncertainty that may arise between
the initial issuance of the semipostal and the actual distribution of
funds. Currently, none of the agencies administering the three semipostals
are providing this degree of disclosure for semipostal programs. Agency
reporting for these semipostals is either subsumed in reports about the
larger programs to which the proceeds are applied or has not yet been
produced. However, these agencies do collect and track this information
and could report it with little difficulty.
Conclusion We found widespread agreement among most parties involved that
the Breast Cancer Research, Heroes of 2001, and Stop Family Violence
stamps were a success. Success can be measured in terms of funds raised,
but also in less tangible ways, such as increased public awareness of an
important issue. If the definition of semipostals success is narrowed
specifically to the funds raised, however, the differences among these
three make it all the more important to pay attention to the lessons
learned, which can help in setting expectations for further semipostal
sales.
Given that new semipostals have been proposed in Congress and the Service
is authorized to issue additional semipostals, the potential is always
there for new semipostals, and therefore the lessons learned may be
helpful in any future considerations. One of these lessons-the need for
accountability-involves actions that can still be taken on these
semipostals, rather than just applied to future semipostals. Through the
Semipostal Act and its related regulations, Congress and the Service have
taken measures to develop criteria for the selection of semipostal issues,
identification of recipient agencies, and reporting of program operations,
but these criteria have thus far been largely bypassed due to the
provisions that have authorized these three semipostals. These three
semipostals lie outside the Semipostal Authorization Act, and may benefit
from applying the reporting requirement. Additionally, if any future
semipostals are authorized by Congress separately from this act, this type
of requirement could be included as part of the legislation in order to
ensure greater accountability and greater support for the semipostals.
Recommendation for Executive Action
To enhance accountability for semipostal proceeds, we recommend that the
Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Homeland Security, and Secretary of
Health and Human Services annually issue reports to the congressional
committees with jurisdiction over the Service, as is currently required
for agencies that are to receive semipostal proceeds under the Semipostal
Authorization Act. Reports should include information on the amount of
funding received, accounting for how the funds were allocated or otherwise
used, and any significant advances or accomplishments that
were funded, in whole or in part, out of the funds received through the
semipostal program.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation
We requested comments on a draft of this report from the Service, ACF,
DOD, FEMA, HHS, and NIH. The Service and DOD provided written comments,
which are summarized below and reprinted in appendix VI and VII,
respectively. ACF, FEMA, HHS, and NIH did not provide comments on this
report.
The Service stated in its comments on the draft report that it generally
agreed with the four key factors that we cited as affecting stamp sales.
The Service agreed that the fund-raising cause and support of advocacy
groups were key factors in the stamps' success. However, the Service
suggested that stamp design and its promotion of the stamps seem to be of
less importance to a semipostal stamp's success as a fund-raiser. The
Service said that its experience indicates that a semipostal's design
plays little role in its effectiveness as a fund-raiser. We based our
conclusion, that stamp design affects the extent to which consumers
support the semipostal, on our discussions with advocacy groups and
fund-raising experts who expressed concern that the design of the Stop
Family Violence stamp-an image of a crying child-may have negatively
affected the sales of that semipostal. Therefore, we continue to believe
that the design was a factor in the stamp's sales.
Regarding promotional activities for specific semipostals, the Service
correctly noted that its current policy requires that promotional costs be
deducted from the funds raised, which can lead to the federal agencies
receiving less semipostal proceeds. We acknowledge that HHS chose not to
have the Service develop an extensive advertising campaign after the
Service changed its policy on semipostal promotional costs, and our
finding is not meant as a criticism of the Service. Nevertheless, the
striking differences in results leads us to conclude that the Service's
promotional efforts can make a difference: the Service spent about $1
million to promote the Breast Cancer Research stamp, which raised $44
million in 7 years; it spent about $1 million to promote the Heroes of
2001 stamp, which raised over $10.5 million in 2.5 years; and it spent
about $77,000 to promote the Stop Family Violence stamp, which has raised
nearly $2 million in 1.6 years. Our conclusion was reinforced by the
fund-raising experts that we spoke with who agreed that in most cases
there is a connection between the amount invested in a fund-raising effort
and the amounts raised.
DOD concurred with our recommendation to improve reporting of how
semipostal proceeds are used. DOD explained that the Army will include in
its annual report to Congress on "Congressionally Directed Medical
Research Programs" a section on DOD's use of Breast Cancer Research stamp
proceeds. It noted that this report will highlight significant advances or
accomplishments that were funded, in whole or in part, through these
proceeds.
We are sending copies of this report to Senators Dianne Feinstein and Kay
Bailey Hutchison and Representative Joe Baca because of their interest in
the Breast Cancer Research stamp; Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and
Charles E. Schumer because of their interest in the Heroes of 2001 stamp;
the Postmaster General; the Chairman of the Postal Rate Commission; and
other interested parties. We will make copies available to others upon
request. This report will also be available on our Web site at no charge
at http://www.gao.gov.
If you have any question about this report, please contact me at (202)
512-2834 or at [email protected]. Contact points for our Offices of
Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page
of this report. Key contributors to this report included Gerald P. Barnes,
Assistant Director; Kathleen Gilhooly; Molly Laster; Heather MacLeod;
Joshua Margraf; Stan Stenersen; and Gregory Wilmoth.
Katherine A. Siggerud Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues
Appendix I
Scope and Methodology
To determine the amount of money raised by the semipostals, we analyzed
semipostal sales data provided to us by the U.S. Postal Service (Service).
For each semipostal, these data included the amount of quarterly stamp
sales and the amount of proceeds transferred to the designated federal
agencies. The data also included administrative costs deducted by the
Service from the total sales amounts, which we have reported in appendix
II.1 To determine the reliability of the data we received, we obtained and
reviewed specific information on the Service's data collection methods,
including data storage and system controls. We determined that the data
were sufficiently reliable for the purpose of this report.
To identify potential factors affecting the patterns of fund-raising sales
for each of the semipostals, we asked stakeholders for their opinions
regarding such factors and identified common trends. As part of this
effort, we spoke with Service officials; the American Philatelic Society;
professional fundraising organizations; and national advocacy groups
affiliated with breast cancer, emergency relief personnel affected by the
terrorist attacks of September 11, and domestic violence. We also spoke
with Dr. Ernie Bodai, who is credited with conceiving the idea for the
Breast Cancer Research stamp, and Ms. Betsy Mullen, who along with Dr.
Bodai lobbied Congress for the stamp. Additionally, we gathered
information about Service and advocacy group efforts to promote each of
the semipostals. Table 8 identifies the stakeholders whom we spoke with.
1Appendix II also includes a summary of changes to the Service's cost
recovery regulations, since our 2003 report.
Appendix I Scope and Methodology
Table 8: Agencies, Advocacy Groups, and Organizations that GAO Interviewed About
Factors Affecting Semipostal Sales
Organizations interviewed
Breast Cancer Research Stamp Women's Information Network Against Breast
Cancer The National Breast Cancer Coalition The Susan G. Komen Breast
Cancer Foundation The National Institutes of Health, National Cancer
Institute U.S. Department of Defense, Army Medical Research and Materiel
Command
Heroes of 2001 Stamp The National Fallen Firefighters Foundation The New
York City Police Foundation The September 11th Families Association U.S.
Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency
Stop Family Violence Stamp The Family Violence Prevention Fund The
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence The National Domestic
Violence Hotline The National Network to End Domestic Violence The
National Resource Center on Domestic Violence U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families
Fund-raising organizations The Association of Fundraising Professionals
The American Red Cross The Better Business Bureau, Wise Giving Alliance
Source: GAO.
To determine how the designated federal agencies have used semipostal
proceeds and reported results, we interviewed key officials from each
agency receiving funds. These agencies included the National Cancer
Institute (NCI) within the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Army
Medical Research and Materiel Command within the Department of Defense
(DOD), the Federal Emergency Management Agency within the Department of
Homeland Security, and the Administration for Children and Families within
the Department of Health and Human Services. We also obtained and reviewed
available agency documentation about grant programs funded with semipostal
proceeds, including grant program development, purpose and goals, award
and program guidelines, the number and amounts of awards, reporting
requirements, performance measures, and grant outcomes. We did not assess
each agency's semipostal grant program as this was not included in the
scope of our work, nor did we evaluate grant performance measures that
might be included in agency reporting.
Appendix I Scope and Methodology
Finally, to describe the monetary and other resources expended by the
Service in operating and administering the semipostal program, we obtained
and analyzed the Service's data on costs of administering semipostals as
well as what costs the Service has recovered. We also interviewed
officials in the Service's Offices of Stamp Services and Finance to
determine what progress the Service has made in revising its regulations.
We spoke with officials from the Service's Legal Counsel to determine
whether the Service has established baseline costs for the semipostal
program as per our prior recommendation.
Appendix II
Postal Service Semipostal Costs and Semipostal Cost Recovery Regulation
Changes
The Service has incurred over $16.5 million on operating and administering
the Breast Cancer Research, Heroes of 2001, and Stop Family Violence
stamps. Of this amount, the Service has recovered about $1.8 million from
semipostal proceeds, with the remainder recovered through the First-Class
postage rate. The Service's costs related to the Breast Cancer Research
stamp have by far eclipsed costs of the other two semipostals, reflecting
the amount of time that the stamp has been offered for sale and other
factors. In our previous work, we expressed concern over the Service's
cost recovery regulations. Since our 2003 report, the Service has taken
several steps to revise its cost recovery regulations, and has established
baseline costs to identify and recover the Service's reasonable costs
related to the semipostals.
Monetary Resources Devoted to the Semipostals
According to Service policy, cost items recoverable from the funds raised
by semipostals include, but are not limited to, packaging costs in excess
of those for comparable stamps, printing costs for flyers or special
receipts, costs of changes to equipment, costs of developing and executing
marketing and promotional plans in excess of those for comparable stamps,
and other costs that would not normally have been incurred for comparable
stamps.1 Specifically, the Service has identified 13 cost categories that
it uses to track semipostal costs.2 These categories include the
following:
o stamp design;
o stamp production and printing;
o shipping and distribution;
o training;
o selling stamps;
o withdrawing stamps from sale;
o destroying unsold stamps;
139 C.F.R. part 551. 2USPS June 25, 2004, report to Congress.
Appendix II
Postal Service Semipostal Costs and
Semipostal Cost Recovery Regulation
Changes
o advertising;
o packaging stamps;
o printing flyers and special receipts;
o equipment changes;
o developing and executing marketing and promotional plans; and
o other costs (legal, market research, and consulting).
Costs reported by the Service totaled $16.5 million through March 31, 2005
(see table 9). Costs for the Breast Cancer Research stamp accounted for
more than $11 million of this amount. The Service determined that about
$1.8 million of the total costs related to the three stamps represented
costs that were attributable specifically to the semipostals and would not
normally have been incurred for comparable stamps, and therefore needed to
be recovered. The recovered amounts ranged from over $1 million for the
Breast Cancer Research stamp, to just over $200,000 for the Stop Family
Violence stamp. The Service reported that the majority of costs incurred
by the semipostals were covered by the First-Class postage rate, and not
recovered from the proceeds. Table 9 describes the semipostal costs
incurred and recovered by the Service.
Table 9: Semipostal Costs Incurred and Recovered by the Service, through March
31, 2005
Total costs incurred by Costs covered by Costs recovered
the First- from
Semipostal Service Class postage rate semipostal
proceeds
Breast Cancer $11,160,838 $ 10,068,875 $1,091,963
Research
Heroes of 2001 4,287,821 3,764,214 523,607
Stop Family 1,085,370 861,801 223,569
Violence
Total $16,534,029 $14,694,890 $1,839,139
Source: U.S. Postal Service.
The specific costs recovered from surcharge revenues varied by semipostal
not only in amount, but to a degree, in the type of expenditure as well
(see
Appendix II
Postal Service Semipostal Costs and
Semipostal Cost Recovery Regulation
Changes
tables 10 to 12, which show costs for each semipostal).3 For example, when
the Breast Cancer Research and Heroes of 2001 stamps were issued, the
Service had a budget to advertise stamps. Both semipostals incurred
advertising costs of about $1 million, and because advertising costs would
be incurred for comparable stamps, the Service did not recover those
costs. When the Stop Family Violence stamp was issued, the Service reduced
its overall budget and eliminated, among other things, all stamp
advertising, including that for semipostals. Subsequently, the Service
established a policy that all costs incurred for advertising semipostals
would be deducted from the applicable semipostal's surcharge revenue.
Therefore, the advertising costs incurred ($77,000) for this semipostal
were recovered from the surcharge revenue. While policies changed for some
cost categories, they remained consistent for others such as design and
production and printing.
Table 10: Breast Cancer Research Stamp Costs Incurred and Recovered by the
Service from Inception through March 31, 2005
Cost covered by Cost recovered
First- from
Cost item Cost Class postage surcharge revenue
rate
Stamp design $40,000 $40,000 $0
Stamp production and printing 4,221,890 4,221,890
Shipping and distributiona 4,289 4,289
Training 612,000 612,000
Selling stamps (including
employee salaries and 0 0
benefits)b
Withdrawing stamp from salec 166,440 0 166,440
Destroying unsold stampsc 0 0
Advertising 888,000 888,000
Packaging stamps 3,510,496 3,219,696 290,800
Printing flyers and special 238,000 0 238,000
receiptsd
Equipment changes 359,000 176,000 183,000
Developing and executing marketing and promotional plans 1,006,000 851,000
155,000
Other costs
Legal 22,000 0 22,000
Market research 56,000 56,000 0
Consulting 8,000 0 8,000
3The surcharge revenue is the amount paid above the First-Class postage
rate by a semipostal consumer.
Appendix II
Postal Service Semipostal Costs and
Semipostal Cost Recovery Regulation
Changes
(Continued From Previous Page)
Cost covered by Cost recovered
First- from
Cost item Cost Class postage rate surcharge revenue
Field promotion events > 28,723 0 28,723
$3,000
Total $11,160,838 $10,068,875 $1,091,963
Source: U.S. Postal Service.
aThe process of distributing Breast Cancer Research stamps would not
normally differ from those incurred for comparable stamps; therefore, the
Service does not withhold distribution costs from the surcharge revenue.
bThe Service currently does not have a system in place to track the costs
of selling stamps, and because Breast Cancer Research stamps are a small
percentage of total stamp sales, it would be extraordinarily difficult and
costly to attempt to study, analyze, and measure these costs in a live
environment. Moreover, existing data indicate that there is no material
difference in the costs for selling semipostal and other stamps at the
retail window.
cCosts were incurred due to the temporary removal and later redeployment
of the Breast Cancer Research stamp from vending machines from December
31, 2003, to January 26, 2004 (pending congressional authorization to
extend sales of the stamp). However, the procedures for withdrawal of
stamps from sale are the same for all stamp stock, regardless of whether
the stamp is a commemorative, special, or semipostal; therefore,
additional costs would not be incurred for normal withdrawal of the Breast
Cancer Research stamp (until the stamp is permanently withdrawn from
sale), and the costs will not be recovered.
dReceipts initially were a different format than the standard postal
receipt, and the cost was recovered. Receipts now used are a standard form
available for general use. The printing cost is no longer specific to the
Breast Cancer Research stamp, and costs are not recovered.
Table 11: Heroes of 2001 Stamp Costs Incurred and Recovered by the Service from
Inception through March 31, 2005
Cost covered by Cost recovered
First- from
Cost item Cost Class postage surcharge revenue
rate
Stamp design $44,250 $44,250 $0
Stamp production and printing 1,468,600 1,468,600
Shipping and distributiona 0 0
Training 0 0
Selling stamps (including
employee salaries and 0 0
benefits)b
Withdrawing stamp from sale 0 0
Destroying unsold stamps 0 0 0
Advertising 1,109,461 1,109,461 0
Packaging stamps 1,288,758 995,857 292,901
Printing flyers and special 0 0 0
receipts
Equipment changes 0 0 0
Developing and executing
marketing and promotional 330,084 146,046 184,038
plans
Other costs
Legal 0 0 0
Market research 0 0 0
Appendix II
Postal Service Semipostal Costs and
Semipostal Cost Recovery Regulation
Changes
(Continued From Previous Page)
Cost covered by Cost recovered
First- from
Cost item Cost Class postage rate surcharge revenue
Consulting $0 $0 $0
Field promotion events > 46,668 0 46,668
$3,000
Total $4,287,821 $3,764,214 $523,607
Source: U.S. Postal Service.
aThe process of distributing the Heroes of 2001 stamps would not normally
differ from those incurred for comparable stamps. Therefore after
reviewing the costs associated with shipping and distribution of the
Heroes of 2001 stamp, there are no material differences or specific
additional expenses as a result of providing the Heroes of 2001 stamp to
postal units and, therefore, the Service does not withhold distribution
costs from the surcharge revenue. The Service does not track shipping and
distribution costs by stamp issue.
bThe Service does not have a system in place to track the cost of selling
stamps, and because Heroes of 2001 stamps are a small percentage of total
stamp sales, it would be extraordinarily difficult and costly to attempt
to study, analyze and measure these costs in a live environment. Moreover,
existing data indicate that there is no material difference in the costs
for selling semipostal and other stamps at the retail window.
Table 12: Stop Family Violence Stamp Costs Incurred and Recovered by the Service
from Inception through March 31, 2005
Cost covered by Cost recovered
First- from
Cost item Cost Class postage surcharge revenue
rate
Stamp design $39,750 $39,750 $0
Stamp production and printing 285,000 285,000
Shipping and distributiona 0 0
Training 0 0
Selling stamps (including
employee salaries and 0 0
benefits)b
Withdrawing stamp from sale 0 0
Destroying unsold stamps 0 0
Advertisingc 77,069 0 77,069
Packaging stamps 663,873 523,873 140,000
Printing flyers and special 0 0
receipts
Equipment changes 0 0 0
Developing and executing
marketing and promotional 13,178 13,178 0
plans
Other costs
Legal 0 0 0
Market research 0 0 0
Consulting 0 0 0
Field promotion events > 6,500 0 6,500
$3,000
Total $1,085,370 $861,801 $223,569
Source: U.S. Postal Service.
Appendix II
Postal Service Semipostal Costs and
Semipostal Cost Recovery Regulation
Changes
aThe process of distributing Stop Family Violence stamps would not
normally differ from those incurred for comparable stamps. Therefore after
reviewing the costs associated with shipping and distribution of the Stop
Family Violence stamp there are no material differences or specific
additional expenses as a result of providing the Stop Family Violence
stamp to postal units and, therefore, the Service does not withhold
distribution costs from the surcharge revenue. The Service does not track
shipping and distribution costs by stamp issue.
bThe Service does not have a system in place to track these costs and
because Stop Family Violence stamps are a small percentage of total stamp
sales it would be extraordinarily difficult and costly to attempt to
study, analyze, and measure these costs in a live environment. Moreover,
existing data indicate that there is no material difference in the costs
for selling semipostal and other stamps at the retail window.
cAdvertising costs are recovered from the differential revenue only for
the Stop Family Violence stamp. Beginning in 2003, the Service made a
determination not to advertise comparable commemorative stamps. As a
result, the advertising costs for the Stop Family Violence stamp have been
recovered from differential revenue because they were incurred after the
policy became effective. All of these costs are recovered, because the
cost for this line item for comparable stamps would be zero. Advertising
costs for previously issued semipostals were not deducted from
differential revenue because they were incurred before the policy became
effective.
Progress in Revising Regulations Related to Costs
In our September 2003 report on the Breast Cancer Research stamp, we
recommended that the Service reexamine and, as necessary revise its
costrecovery regulations to ensure that the Service establishes baseline
costs for comparable stamps and uses these baselines to identify and
recover costs from the Breast Cancer Research stamp's surcharge revenue.
The Service has taken several steps to revise its regulations including
the following:
1. The final rule in 39 C.F.R. S:551.8, in effect since February 5, 2004,
clarifies Service cost offset policies and procedures for the semipostal
program. Specific changes include
o
o o
o
expanding the types of "comparable stamps" that could be used in
conducting cost comparisons to allow other types of stamps (such as
definitive or special issue stamps) to serve as a baseline for cost
comparisons;
allowing for the use of different comparable stamps for specific cost
comparisons;
clarifying that costs that do not need to be tracked include not only
costs that are too burdensome to track, but also those costs that are too
burdensome to estimate; and
clarifying that several types of costs could be recovered when they
materially exceed the costs of comparable stamps.
Appendix II
Postal Service Semipostal Costs and
Semipostal Cost Recovery Regulation
Changes
2. The Service also amended the regulation 39 C.F.R. S:551.8(e) effective
February 9, 2005, to delete the word "may" from the cost items recoverable
from the surcharge revenue, making the recovery of the costs listed
mandatory rather than optional.
Additionally, we have recommended that the Service establish and publish
baseline costs to provide assurance that the Service is recovering all
reasonable costs of the Breast Cancer Research stamp from the surcharge
revenue. In response, on June 25, 2004, the Service provided a copy of its
baseline analysis to both Congress and GAO in a report entitled United
States Postal Service: Response to the General Accounting Office
Recommendations on the Breast Cancer Research Stamp. In this analysis, the
Office of Stamp Services and Office of Accounting identified comparable
stamps and created a profile of the typical costs characteristics, thereby
establishing a baseline for Breast Cancer Research stamp cost recovery.
Additionally, Service officials reported that they would use the baseline
for the other semipostals.
Appendix III
Semipostal Design
Congress has selected the subject matter for the three semipostals issued
to date. In each case, the Service has then applied the same design
process used for regular commemorative stamps. According to Service
officials, most subjects that appear on commemorative stamps are the
result of suggestions sent in by the public, which number about 50,000
annually. In the case of commemorative stamps, the Postmaster General
determines what stamps will be produced with the assistance of the
Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee (CSAC), which works on behalf of the
Postmaster General to evaluate the merits of all stamp proposals and
selects artwork that best represents the subject matter. Since the three
existing semipostals were mandated by Congress, the Service and CSAC were
not involved in selecting the subject matter. However, the rest of the
stamp design process was the same, with CSAC determining what design would
be used, and the Postmaster General giving final approval. Figure 8 shows
the three semipostals.
Figure 8: The Breast Cancer Research, Heroes of 2001, and Stop Family Violence
Stamps
Source: U.S. Postal Service.
Appendix III Semipostal Design
Breast Cancer Research The Breast Cancer Research stamp was designed by
Ethel Kessler of
Stamp Bethesda, MD, and features the phrases "Fund the Fight" and "Find a
Cure." Whitney Sherman of Baltimore provided the illustration of Diana,
mythical goddess of the hunt, who is reaching behind her head to pull an
arrow from her quiver to fend off an enemy-in this case, breast cancer.
This image reflects the same position that a woman assumes for a breast
self examination and mammography. The various colors represent the
diversity of Americans affected by breast cancer.
Heroes of 2001 Stamp The Heroes of 2001 stamp was designed by Derry Noyes
of Washington, D.C., and features a detail of a photograph by Thomas E.
Franklin. The photograph shows three firefighters, each of whom
participated in the September 11 rescue efforts, raising the U.S. flag in
the ruins of the World Trade Center at Ground Zero in New York. The flag
had been discovered in a boat near the area and was raised on a pole found
in the rubble. The space between the foreground and background of the
picture, which was about 100 yards, helps convey the enormity of the
debris and the task at hand. According to the photographer, the raising of
the flag symbolizes the strength of the firefighters and of the American
people battling the unimaginable. All three firefighters and the
photographer attended the stamp's unveiling ceremony, which marked the
6-month anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks.
Stop Family Violence Stamp When art director Carl T. Herrman selected
Monique Blais, a six-year-old from Santa Barbara, CA, to model for a
photograph that was to be the original design of the Stop Family Violence
stamp, his intention was to photograph Blais erasing a domestic violence
image from a chalkboard- symbolizing eradication of the issue. During a
break in the photo session, however, and without prompting, Blais began
drawing her own picture of what she thought best represented domestic
violence. Photographed by Philip Channing, Blais's drawing became the
basis for the final Stop Family Violence stamp design, which was later
selected by a jury at the 34th Asiago International Prize for Philatelic
Art, in Asiago, Italy as the most beautiful social awareness-themed stamp
issued during 2003. The young artist attended the stamp's unveiling
ceremony at the White House in 2003.
Appendix IV
NIH Breast Cancer Research Awards Funded
with Breast Cancer Research Stamp Proceeds
As of April 2005, NIH had awarded 106 breast cancer research grants
totaling about $16.1 million using proceeds from the Breast Cancer
Research stamp. Individual awards ranged from $47,250 to $616,010 and
averaged about $151,652. Funds received from sales of the Breast Cancer
Research stamp were initially used to fund breast cancer research under
NCI's "Insight Awards to Stamp Out Breast Cancer" initiative, according to
NIH officials. In 2003, NCI's Executive Committee decided to direct the
funds to a newly approved Breast Cancer Research stamp initiative entitled
"Exceptional Opportunities in Breast Cancer Research." Grants awarded
under each program are listed below.
Insight Awards The Insight Awards were designed to fund high-risk
exploration by scientists who are employed outside the federal government
and who conduct breast cancer research at their institutions. NCI
distributed 86 Insight Awards at a total of about $9.5 million. Most of
the awards were for 2-year periods. Individual awards ranged from $47,250
to $142,500 and averaged $111,242, discounting a one-time supplement of
$4,300. Table 13 provides information about each Insight Award funded with
Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds, including the fiscal year of the
award, sponsoring institution, principal investigator, research area, and
the amount of the award.
Table 13: Insight Awards to Stamp Out Breast Cancer Funded with Proceeds,
as of April 2005, from Breast Cancer Research Stamp Sales
Fiscal Institution Principal Research area Amount
year investigator
Albany Medical College Bennett Treatment $116,250
Baylor College of Rosen Metastasis 78,488
Medicine
Beth Israel Deaconess Junghans Biology 130,500
Medical Center
Center for Molecular Blumenthal Treatment
Medicine and 142,500
Immunology/Garden State
Cancer Center
2000 Clemson University Chen Biology/metastasis 105,000
2000 Columbia University Swergold Mutagenesis 127,875
Health Sciences
2000 Dana-Farber Cancer Kufe Biology/ 126,138
Institute tumorigenesis
2000 Fox Chase Cancer Center Russo Tumorigenesis 126,866
2000 Georgetown University Wong Biology/diagnosis 116,950
2000 Hadassah University Vlodavsky Metastasis 61,000
Hospital
2000 Henry M. Jackson Lechleider
Foundation Biology/metastasis 74,000
Appendix IV
NIH Breast Cancer Research Awards Funded
with Breast Cancer Research Stamp Proceeds
(Continued From Previous Page)
Fiscal Institution Principal Research area Amount
year investigator
2000 Institute for Cancer Yeung Prevention/biology $126,866
Research
Long Island Jewish Shi Treatment/nutrition 116,616
Medical Center
Massachusetts General Haber Tumorigenesis 129,500
Hospital
Mount Sinai School of Kretzschmar Metastasis 125,387
Medicine
Schepens Eye Research D'Amore Biology/ tumorigenesis 121,500
Institute
State University of Muti Treatment/nutrition 68,950
New York
Thomas Jefferson Sauter Diagnosis 117,851
University
University of Blumberg Treatment 105,946
California, Irvine
University of
California, San Collins Treatment 110,625
Francisco
University of Hawaii Gotay Treatment 101,000
University of Illinois Westbrook Metastasis 116,475
at Chicago
University of Jerry Biology/tumorigenesis 115,125
Massachusetts, Amherst
University of Thompson Metastasis 75,000
Melbourne
University of Lemmon Biology/treatment 118,875
Pennsylvania
University of Radice Metastasis 118,875
Pennsylvania
University of Nichols Biology/treatment 112,500
Pittsburgh
2000 University of Utah Grissom Treatment 112,125
2000 University of Vermont Krag Treatment 113,250
2000 Virginia Mason Nelson Biology/treatment 47,250
Research Center
2000 Wake Forest University Shelness Treatment 108,750
2000 Yale University Zhang Biology/ tumorigenesis 122,625
2001 Albany Medical College Bennett Treatment 116,250
of Union University
2001 Baylor College of Rosen Metastasis 109,322
Medicine
2001 Beth Israel Deaconess Junghans Biology 128,509
Medical Center
2001 Clemson University Chen Biology/metastasis 105,000
2001 Columbia University Fisher Treatment 127,875
Health Sciences
2001 Columbia University Swergold Mutagenesis 127,875
Health Sciences
2001 Dana-Farber Cancer Garber Prevention 128,750
Institute
2001 Dana-Farber Cancer Kufe Biology/ tumorigenesis 99,297
Institute
2001 Fox Chase Cancer Russo Tumorigenesis 126,133
Center
2001 Garden State Cancer Blumenthal Treatment 142,500
Center
2001 Georgetown University Dickson Tumorigenesis 116,600
2001 Georgetown University Byers Prognosis/biology 116,550
2001 Georgetown University Wong Biology/diagnosis 116,400
2001 Hadassah University Vlodavsky Metastasis 61,000
Hospital
2001 Henry M. Jackson Lechleider
Foundation for the Biology/metastasis 74,000
Advancement of Military Medicine
Appendix IV
NIH Breast Cancer Research Awards Funded
with Breast Cancer Research Stamp Proceeds
(Continued From Previous Page)
Fiscal Institution Principal Research area Amount
year investigator
2001 Institute for Yeung Prevention/biology $126,133
Cancer Research
Johns Hopkins Fedarko Metastasis 122,750
University
Long Island Jewish Shi Treatment/nutrition 117,050
Medical Center
Massachusetts Haber Tumorigenesis 127,500
General Hospital
Medical Diagnostic Chance Diagnosis 92,500
Research Foundation
Mount Sinai School
of Medicine of New Kretzschmar Metastasis
York 127,125
University
Northwestern Jordan Prevention 110,250
University
Schepens Eye D'Amore Biology/tumorigenesis 121,500
Research Institute
Stanford University Contag Diagnosis/ metastasis 119,597
Thomas Jefferson Sauter Diagnosis 119,148
University
University of Radany Biology 112,800
California, Irvine
University of Blumberg Treatment 112,800
California, Irvine
University of
California, San Collins Treatment 110,625
Francisco
University of Gotay Treatment 99,411
Hawaii, Manoa
University of Westbrook Metastasis 115,959
Illinois
University of
Massachusetts, Jerry Biology/tumorigenesis 112,431
Amherst
2001 University of Thompson Metastasis 75,000
Melbourne
University of
2001 Minnesota, Twin Sheaff Biology/prevention 111,375
Cities
2001 University of Lemmon Biology/treatment 118,875
Pennsylvania
2001 University of Radice Metastasis 118,875
Pennsylvania
2001 University of Nichols Biology/treatment 112,323
Pittsburgh
2001 University of Utah Grissom Treatment 112,500
University of
2001 Vermont and State Treatment
Agricultural Krag 112,302
College
2001 Virginia Mason Nelson Biology/treatment 47,250
Research Center
2001 Wake Forest Shelness Treatment 108,375
University
2001 Wayne State Fernandez-Madri Diagnosis 111,750
University
2001 Whitehead Institute Weinberg Biology 116,250
for Biomed Res
2001 Yale University Zhang Biology/tumorigenesis 122,625
2002 Columbia University Fisher Treatment 122,799
Health Sciences
2002 Dana-Farber Cancer Garber Prevention 128,375
Institute
2002 Fox Chase Cancer Russo Tumorigenesis 4,300
Center
2002 Georgetown Dickson Tumorigenesis 116,400
University
2002 Georgetown Byers Prognosis/biology 116,400
University
2002 Johns Hopkins Fedarko Metastasis 114,274
University
2002 Medical Diagnostic Chance
Research Foundation Diagnosis 103,350
Appendix IV
NIH Breast Cancer Research Awards Funded
with Breast Cancer Research Stamp Proceeds
(Continued From Previous Page)
Fiscal year Principal investigator Research area Amount
Institution
2002 University of Radany Biology $112,800
California, Irvine
University of
Minnesota, Twin Sheaff Biology/prevention 111,375
Cities
Wayne State Fernandez-Madrid Diagnosis 111,750
University
Whitehead Institute
for Biomedical Weinberg Biology 116,250
Research
Total insight awards $9,459,871
Sources: NCI, NIH.
Exceptional Opportunity Awards
The Exceptional Opportunities were designed to advance breast cancer
research by funding high-quality, peer-reviewed, breast cancer grant
applications that are outside the current funding ability of NCI. When NIH
began awarding these grants, the number of annual awards decreased from
about 29 per year to 10, while the average amount tripled. In all, NCI
dispersed Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds to 20 Exceptional
Opportunities awards, each funded for a maximum of 4 years. The awards
totaled about $6.6 million and covered research areas that included
prevention, diagnosis, biology, and treatment. Individual awards ranged
from $81,000 to $616,010 and averaged $330,763. Table 14 provides
information about each Exceptional Opportunities Award, including the
fiscal year of the award, sponsoring institution, principal investigator,
research area, and the amount of the award.
Table 14: Exceptional Opportunities in Breast Cancer Research Funded with
Proceeds, as of April 2005, from Breast Cancer Research Stamp Sales
Fiscal Institution Principal Research area Amount
year investigator
Columbia University Health Harlap Prevention $616,010
Sciences
Johns Hopkins University Ouwerkerk Diagnosis 154,852
Northwestern University Huang Diagnosis/Biology 389,482
2003 St. Vincent's Institute of Price Biology/treatment 108,000
Med. Res.
2003 University of California Neuhausen Biology/prevention 545,271
Irvine
2003 University of Pennsylvania Lee Treatment/Biology 198,759
2003 University of Pittsburgh Niener Diagnosis 405,009
at Pittsburgh
2003 University of Texas Lu Prevention/Biology 532,409
Medical Br Galveston
2003 University of Toronto Vogel Biology/treatment 81,000
2003 University of Wisconsin Schuler Biology/treatment 268,791
Madison
2004 Columbia University Health Prevention
Sciences Harlap 604,299
Appendix IV
NIH Breast Cancer Research Awards Funded
with Breast Cancer Research Stamp Proceeds
(Continued From Previous Page)
Fiscal year Institution Principal Research area Amount
investigator
2004 Johns Hopkins University Ouwerkerk Diagnosis $157,176
Northwestern University Huang Diagnosis/Biology 389,522
St. Vincent's Institute of Med. Price Biology/treatment 108,000
Res.
University of California Irvine Neuhausen Biology/prevention 545,576
University of Pennsylvania Lee Treatment/Biology 198,759
University of Pittsburgh at Niener Diagnosis 410,688
Pittsburgh
University of Texas Medical Br. Lu Prevention/Biology 566,037
Galveston
University of Toronto Vogel Biology/treatment 81,000
University of Wisconsin Madison Schuler Biology/treatment 254,625
Total exceptional opportunities $6,615,265
Sources: NCI, NIH.
Appendix V
DOD Breast Cancer Research Awards Funded
with Breast Cancer Research Stamp Proceeds
As of April 2005, DOD had awarded 27 breast cancer research grants
totaling about $11 million using proceeds from the Breast Cancer Research
stamp. Individual awards ranged from $5,000 to $767,171 and averaged
$400,405. DOD applies Breast Cancer Research stamp proceeds to its Breast
Cancer Research Program in order to fund Idea Awards, which are grants
that focus on innovative approaches to breast cancer research and cover
research areas such as genetics, biology, imaging, epidemiology,
immunology, and therapy. According to DOD officials, about $500,000 of the
transferred funds had been used for overhead costs.1 Table 15 provides
information about each Idea Award funded with Breast Cancer Research stamp
proceeds, including the fiscal year of the award, sponsoring institution,
principal investigator, research area, and the amount of the award.
Table 15: Idea Awards for Breast Cancer Research Funded with Proceeds, as
of April 2005, from Breast Cancer Research Stamp Sales
Fiscal
year Institution Principal Research area Amount
investigator
1999 University of Texas, SW Medical White Molecular $334,094
Center Biology
1999 University of Arkansas Shah Cell Biology 279,000
1999 University of California, Davis Heyer Molecular 111,444
Biology
1999 Garvan Institute Daly Cell Biology 283,649
1999 Garvan Institute Musgrove Cell Biology 222,652
1999 Texas A&M University Wang Imaging 317,510
1999 Scripps Institute Deuel Molecular 5,000
Biology
1999 Tel Aviv University Wreschner Cell Biology 225,000
2000 Burnham Institute Adamson Cell Biology 578,183
2000 University of Arizona Akporiaye Immunology 454,500
2000 University of Toronto Penn Molecular 296,142
Biology
2001 University of California, Davis Carraway Cell Biology 427,225
2001 Purdue University Geahlen Cell Biology 425,425
2001 St. Luke's - Roosevelt Hospital Rosner
Center Cell Biology 454,181
1In fiscal year 2001, DOD started to deduct overhead costs from the
surcharge revenue. DOD estimates overhead costs at 8 percent annually. Any
savings in overhead are added to the funds available to research. Overhead
costs have averaged about 5.6 percent since DOD started recovering them.
DOD's standard policy is to deduct administrative costs from all sources
of funding used for its Breast Cancer Research Program.
Appendix V DOD Breast Cancer Research Awards Funded with Breast Cancer
Research Stamp Proceeds
(Continued From Previous Page)
Fiscal
year Institution Principal Research area Amount
investigator
2001 University of Texas, Chaudhary Cell Biology $312,434
SW Medical Center
2001 Vanderbilt Cai Epidemiology/Genetics 560,144
University
2002 University of South Dou Therapy 491,999
Florida
2002 Fox Chase Cancer Godwin Genetics 504,000
Center
2002 Yale University Perkins Genetics 490,500
2003 International Agency Kaaks Epidemiology/Genetics 367,639
for Cancer Research
University of
2003 California, San Ziv Epidemiology/Genetics 767,171
Francisco
2003 Yale University Chung Diagnostics 490,447
2003 Lawrence Berkeley Yaswen Molecular Biology 508,790
National Laboratory
2004 Vanderbilt Giorgio Diagnosis 453,000
University
2004 Northern California Clarke Epidemiology/Genetics 588,738
Cancer Center
2004 Lawrence Berkeley Bissell Cell Biology 386,569
National Laboratory
2004 University of Lemmon Therapy 475,500
Pennsylvania
Total $10,810,936
Sources: U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, DOD.
Appendix VI
Comments from the U.S. Postal Service
Appendix VI
Comments from the U.S. Postal Service
Appendix VII
Comments from the Department of Defense
Appendix VII
Comments from the Department of Defense
GAO's Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation
and investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO
examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies;
and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help
Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's
commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of
accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO
documents at no cost
is through GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO postsGAO
Reports and newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its
Web site. To Testimony have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products
every afternoon, go to
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out
to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard.
Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25
percent. Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington,
D.C. 20548
To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202)
512-6061
To Report Fraud, Contact:
Waste, and Abuse in Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm
E-mail: [email protected] Programs Automated answering system: (800)
424-5454 or (202) 512-7470
Congressional Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4400 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125
Relations Washington, D.C. 20548
Public Affairs Paul Anderson, Managing Director, [email protected] (202)
512-4800 U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D.C. 20548
*** End of document. ***