Instead, their preference has often been to assign administrative responsibilities to newly created independent agencies or to hybrid organizations possessing legal characteristics of both the governmental and private sectors. Hybrid organizations attract both support and criticism. The one common characteristic to this melange of entities in the quasi government is that they are not agencies of the United States as that term is defined in Title 5 of the U.S. Code . This report follows the linear spectrum approach in describing the elements within the quasi government. It is possible to begin with what are referred to in the U.S. Government Manual as "Quasi Official Agencies," those entities, arguably, closest to the executive branch, and move on to the other end of the spectrum, "congressionally chartered nonprofit organizations," those entities, arguably, the furthest from the executive branch. For the purpose of budgetary treatment, Congress defined the term "government-sponsored enterprise" in the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1990 to refer to
a corporate entity created by a law of the United States that—
(A) (i) has a Federal charter authorized by law;
(ii) is privately owned, as evidenced by capital stock owned by private entities or individuals;
(iii) is under the direction of a board of directors, a majority of which is elected by private owners;
(iv) is a financial institution with power to—
(I) make loans or loan guarantees for limited purposes such as to provide credit for specific borrowers or one sector; and
(II) raise funds by borrowing (which does not carry the full faith and credit of the Federal Government) or to guarantee the debt of others in unlimited amounts; and
(B) (i) does not exercise powers that are reserved to the Government as sovereign (such as the power to tax or to regulate interstate commerce);
(ii) does not have the power to commit the Government financially (but it may be a recipient of a loan guarantee commitment made by the Government); and
(iii) has employees whose salaries and expenses are paid by the enterprise and are not Federal employees subject to title 5. While these distinctions have an arbitrary character imposed after the fact, there is nonetheless some utility in beginning the review of the agency-related nonprofit organization category within the quasi government as being of three essential types. In the past decade, venture capital funds have been established to fund research into technology. In-Q-Tel is not the only domestic entity of this type. Instrumentalities of Indeterminate Character

Not all the hybrid organizations fit into categories within the quasi government. Illustrative of quasi governmental entities are three examples that arguably merit discrete review. In their view, the issues are not economic in their fundamentals, but constitutional and legal. The underlying premise of the entrepreneurial management paradigm is that the governmental and private sectors are essentially alike in the fundamentals, and thus subject to many of the same economically derived behavioral norms. They see political accountability and due process being superseded by the primacy of performance and results, however defined.
To assist Congress in its oversight, this report provides an overview of federally related entities that possess legal characteristics of both the governmental and private sectors. These hybrid organizations (e.g., Fannie Mae, National Park Foundation, In-Q-Tel), collectively referred to in this report as the "quasi government," have grown in number, size, and importance in recent decades.
A brief review of executive branch organizational history is followed by a description of entities with ties to the executive branch, although they are not "agencies" of the United States as defined in Title 5 of the U.S. Code. Several categories of quasi governmental entities are defined and discussed: (1) quasi official agencies; (2) government-sponsored enterprises (GSE); (3) federally funded research and development corporations; (4) agency-related nonprofit organizations; (5) venture capital funds; (6) congressionally chartered nonprofit organizations; and (7) instrumentalities of indeterminate character.
The quasi government, not surprisingly, is a controversial subject. To supporters of this trend toward greater reliance upon hybrid organizations, the proper objective of governmental management is to maximize performance and results, however defined. In their view, the private and governmental sectors are alike in their essentials, and thus subject to the same economically derived behavioral norms. They tend to welcome this trend toward greater use of quasi governmental entities.
Critics of the quasi government, on the other hand, tend to view hybrid organizations as contributing to a weakened capacity of government to perform its fundamental constitutional duties, and to an erosion in political accountability, a crucial element in democratic governance. They tend to consider the governmental and private sectors as being legally distinct, with relatively little overlap in behavioral norms.
There is nothing modest about the size, scope, and impact of the quasi government. Quasi governmental entities run the gamut, from not-for-profit organizations that raise funds for the upkeep of parks to venture capital entities that fund the development of new technologies of use by federal agencies.
This report will be updated in the event of a significant development.