In 1967, the Congress chartered the Foundation as the official national,  nonprofit fund-raising partner of the Park Service. Foundation revenues more than doubled from about $24  million in fiscal year 1999 to about $52 million in fiscal year 2003. Corporations Contributed to Significant Rise in Private Support

For fiscal years 1999 through 2003, private contributions more than  doubled, from approximately $18 million in 1999 to just over $41 million in  2003. Corporations Are a Major Source for Private Donations

The Foundation has made a concerted effort to direct its fund-raising  efforts primarily at corporations. In instances where the donors decide  to support systemwide projects, the Foundation requests that all interested  parties submit grant proposals, indicating how they would use these  donations. The Foundation may  use various means to distribute general donations to support park  activities. Bulk of Donations to the Foundation Is Restricted for a Specific Use

The bulk of the private donations received by the Foundation is restricted  or targeted for specific uses. For example, one corporation  agreed to raise $5 million to support the restoration of the Washington  Monument in Washington, D.C.—a project that was on the Park Service’s  priority list in anticipation of future federal funding. The Foundation’s approach to fund-raising for systemwide programs has  led some Park Service officials to contend that the Foundation’s support is  not being focused where it could do the most good—to better support  individual higher priority projects at local parks. Some Park Service officials are concerned that the Foundation has not  fulfilled its commitments to provide fund-raising support. Recommendations for Executive Action

To reduce the confusion and misunderstanding and improve  communication between the National Park Foundation and the Park  Service, we are recommending that the Secretary of the Interior require the  Director of the National Park Service to take the following five steps:  work collaboratively with the Foundation to develop an overall written  agreement that, among other things, articulates the Foundation’s fund- raising strategy and clarifies the roles and responsibilities of the  Foundation and the Park Service in their partnering relationship;  identify and document all current and future fund-raising agreements  made with the Foundation, specifying the terms of work agreed to by  each party;  provide a list of individual park project priorities, including those  potentially fundable by nonprofits, and communicate them to the  Foundation for consideration in fund-raising;   develop and implement internal controls such that fund-raising  agreements are documented in writing and subsequent performance is  tracked against the agreement; and  clarify whether the exclusivity terms in Foundation agreements with  Proud Partners apply to park-based cause-related marketing  arrangements and communicate this information to all of the Park  Service’s fund-raising partners. Recommendations to the National Park Foundation

To improve its communication with the Park Service and improve  management controls, we are making four recommendations to the  National Park Foundation, namely that it take the following four steps:  enter into an overall written agreement with the Park Service that  includes its fund-raising strategy and clarifies the roles and  responsibilities of the Foundation and the Park Service in their  partnering relationship;  identify and document all current and future fund-raising agreements  made with the Park Service, specifying the terms of work agreed to by  each party;  develop a process, either through training or briefings, to help ensure  complete and consistent understanding of its fund-raising strategy and  roles and responsibilities with the Park Service headquarters, regional,  and local park officials; and  in developing its fund-raising approach, consider the list of individual  park priorities compiled and provided by the Park Service—this list  could be used for identifying patterns of park needs for systemwide  projects as well as for identifying specific needs that may be of interest  to potential donors. To determine the extent that contributions assisted the Park Service in  addressing park priorities, we reviewed the Foundation’s grant awards and  available discretionary funds and interviewed Foundation officials about  how these funds are raised and used to fulfill individual park requests. GAO Comments

1. 2. 3.
Why GAO Did This Study

In 1967, the Congress created the National Park Foundation (Foundation)--a nonprofit organization with the sole purpose of providing private support to the National Park Service (Park Service). However, some Park Service officials have raised concerns that the Foundation's support is not meeting parks' priority needs. In this context, congressional requesters asked GAO to review the activities of the Foundation by determining the (1) Foundation's roles and responsibilities for raising funds to support the Park Service, (2) amount and kinds of donations the Foundation has raised between fiscal years 1999 and 2003, and (3) extent to which the contributions obtained by the Foundation assisted the Park Service in addressing park priorities.

What GAO Found

In accordance with its legislative charter, the Foundation raises private donations from a variety of sources and has broad discretion in how it distributes these donations to support the Park Service. In general, the Foundation's policy is to support systemwide projects that serve the Park Service and are not otherwise federally funded, such as supporting temporary transportation advisors to help alleviate congestion at national parks. Overall, annual private donations to the Foundation have more than doubled--from $18 million in fiscal year 1999 to $41 million in fiscal year 2003. Much of this increase has stemmed from the Foundation's concerted effort to target corporate donations, which accounted for the bulk of the donations received. Most of the corporate donations are noncash or "inkind," such as providing expertise to renovate the red bus fleet in Glacier National Park or providing electric vehicles to parks in California. Corporate donors typically specify how their donations are to be used. For example, one corporation donated funds to renovate a national monument in the District of Columbia. The Foundation, in consultation with the Park Service, decided to use these funds to renovate the Washington Monument. Because the majority of the Foundation's donations are restricted by the donors for a specific use, there are limited funds available to respond to some parks' requests, such as for fund-raising assistance or support for local nonprofit groups. Consequently, some park officials question the usefulness of Foundation donations and believe support should be directed at park priorities. In an effort to raise more discretionary funds and possibly better support individual park needs, the Foundation is expanding its fund-raising approach to attract more donations from individuals. The Foundation's efforts to assist the Park Service are hampered by poor communication and documentation problems. First, unlike most other partner relationships with the Park Service, the Foundation and the Park Service do not have a comprehensive written agreement that clearly describes the Foundation's fund-raising strategy and clarifies the roles and responsibilities of each partner. Second, the Foundation and the Park Service sometimes enter into verbal rather than written fund-raising agreements, thereby making it more difficult to determine the responsibilities of each party and whether commitments were met. Third, Foundation and Park Service officials disagree about the fund-raising strategy as well as the objectives for one of the Foundation's key fundraising programs. Both parties have taken initial steps to address these and other communication problems.