Author - Joanne Roll

The unexpected and early resignation of Peace Corps Director Aaron Williams and the possible change in the political party winning the White House in November may mean trouble ahead for the Peace Corps.  Four of the most egregious crimes against serving Peace Corps Volunteers occurred during a time of transition or anticipated transition from one political party in power to the other. The extraordinary number of political appointees in the Peace Corps agency and the always rapid staff turnover due to the Five Year Rule may have contributed to a lack of support to Volunteers during such times. Four crimes over more than thirty years do not a pattern make, nor are these by any means the only crimes against serving Volunteers. What they do is highlight the inadequacy of the agency’s response associated with a time of political transition. The mid-70s were a time of political turmoil. Under threat . . .

The Inspector General of the Peace Corps has reviewed the unique Five Year Rule and made recommendations to Director Williams.  Sometime in August, Williams will announce policy changes and proposed legislative changes.  I would urge the RPCV community to be knowledgeable about the review. Here are the Pros and Cons of the Five Year Rule according to the Inspector General of the Peace Corps PRO:  The Executive Summary listed the advantages of the Five Year Rule (FYR). The following is quoted from that summary. Peace Corps’ staff asserted that the FYR results in a mission-driven, energetic, and optimistic workforce attracted to the Peace Corps in spite of the time-limited appointment. The high rate of staff turnover driven by the FYR has allowed the agency to hire extensively from the returned Peace Corps Volunteer (RPCV) population–one of the stated goals behind the establishment of the FYR. Just over 50 percent of all USDHs employed by Peace . . .

Dr. Robert Textor is the author of the original, 1961  “In, Up and Out” memo that became the foundation for the so-called “Five Year Rule.” He is also champions serving Volunteers as well as RPCVs. His insight allowed for the continual hiring of RPCVs at Peace Corps. The recent Inspector General of the Peace Corps reviewed the so-called “Five Year Rule”.  Dr. Textor’s memo and comments are included in the final report. It is anticipated that Peace Corps will be releasing its proposed policy changes sometime in August. Dr. Textor is recuperating from successfully surgery.  It is hoped that he will be able to review the Peace Corps proposals when they are released. Right now, his family reports that he would love to receive cards and messages from his friends. This is his address: Robert B. Textor Mirabella Portland Skilled Nursing Facility 3550 SW Bond Ave, Room 241 Portland, OR 97239

One of the commerative events for the 50th Anniversary was a Panel discussion on March 17, 2011  “The early years of the Peace Corps”, featuring a great speech by  Bill Moyer. This is a good time to be reminded of those days and those men who first made the unique organization possible.  This is a good time because Peace Corps is facing a possible reorganization. It is still possible for RPCVs to obtain a free DVD copy. Karen Chaput, the Director of Video Production in the Peace Corps Office of Communication is currently on maternity leave. In her absence, Lee Gillenwater is the person to contact at this email to request a copy. Cut and paste this email address into your browser. lgillenwater@peacecorps.gov

The Office of the Inspector General of the Peace Corps spent a year evaluating the impact of the Five Year Rule.  This is the first public report that I could find that references the original memo from Dr. Robert Textor in 1961.  That memo became the founding document for Peace Corps Five Year Rule.  In this evaluation, the evaluators begin with the original memo and show that the intent was to link limited tenure and the employment of former Peace Corps Volunteers.  It also emphasizes that Dr. Textor never recommended that tenure be limited to five years.  He recommended perhaps eight years. The report describes both positive and negative impacts of the rule and makes recommendations to Director Williams to formulate polices and procedures to correct the negative impact.  It is vital that the Peace Corps community become knowledgeable about this report and it possible implications for policy and law. . . .

UPDATE:  Peace Corps has just released the long awaited Inspector General’s review of the Five Year Rule.  To read this report in its PDF form, go to peacecorps.gov; scroll to the bottom of the page and click on Office of the Inspector General. The report will be the first one listed, Click on it for the PDF. I expect that a direct link will be posted to Peace Corps Worldwide, soon. Of remarkable note is the fact that the Inspector General’s report quotes extensively from Dr. Textor’s original memo. Dr. Robert B. Textor proposed in an memo on December 11, 1961 a personnel policy for the Peace Corps. In 2011, he revisited the memo and wrote an essay describing his memo and the analysis that promoted it.  The entire essay can be and should be read at: http://www.stanford.edu/~rbtextor/History_of_In_Up_Out_Policy.pdf I would like to quote from that essay: “This essay deals with . . .

The Office of the Inspector General of the Peace Corps will publish its yearlong review of the “Five Year Rule” within the next “two to three weeks.” Fifty years ago, Dr. Robert Textor authored the original “In, Up, and Out” memo that morphed into the Five Year Rule. Unfortunately, he is scheduled for surgery on June 29th.  He made a reasonable request to be allowed to see the final review before his surgery. The Office of the Inspector General of the Peace Corps considered the request for two days and then denied it without explanation. Dr. Robert Textor was a young Anthropologist who was called to Peace Corps Washington in June of 1961 to consult the fledging agency. As an Anthropologist who had done field work in Thailand, Textor knew how critically important “transcultural experience” was. He wanted to make sure that Peace Corps Washington could capture the “transcultural experience” . . .

The first number speaks to the Goals of the Peace Corps spelled out, with typical Kennedy eloquence, fifty years ago. The second is the Five Year Rule that defines the unique tenure law in the Peace Corps personnel system, limiting most appointments to a total of five years. The Goals are timeless, but the rule of “Five Years” may be changing. Last year, Inspector General of the Peace Corps announced a review of the Five Year Rule. The final draft of that evaluation and its recommendations are being reviewed. The Inspector General expects to publish the final report anytime within the next 30 days. I make the argument that Peace Corps has been most successful in accomplishing Goal Two – Helping promote a better understanding of Americans on the part of the peoples served- and Three-Helping promote a better understanding of Americans on the part of the peoples served. These . . .

From the Peace Corps Response website: http://www.peacecorps.gov/index.cfm?shell=response.events May 03, 2012 Peace Corps Response Application Workshop (Web-Ex)
12:00 p.m. (EST) Register Check out our new and easy application process in a virtual information session May 3rd. Learn how to set up search agents, apply for multiple positions and check your application status at any time during the application process. We will also provide insider tips on how to get your application noticed by a Recruiter! Peace Corps Response provides opportunities for Returned Peace Corps Volunteers (RPCVs) and experienced professionals to undertake challenging, short (3-12 month) assignments in various program areas around the world. Attend this webinar to find out more information about our exciting new programs, upcoming assignments, and how to apply.
 Please register at least 24 hours in advance. Peace Corps Response is being expanded to include non-RPCVs.  Historically, Peace Corps has not been able to meet the demand for trained Personnel. This . . .

  The following document summarizes how events dictated the final decision: “Summary of Events Leading to the Withdrawal of Peace Corps Volunteers from El Salvador” (DNSA/GWU:Collection: El Salvador, The Making of U.S. Policy 1977-1984, Item Number: ES00332)   In early January, PC Deputy Director William Sykes and LAC Regional Director Paul Bell traveled to El Salvador to assess the situation. After much dialogue with PCVs, PC staff, American Embassy and GOES officials, the recommendation was given to Peace Corps Director Richard Celeste not to withdraw the PCVS. (My note: there is an attachment referenced describing the reasons behind this recommendation. I could not locate it. It is cited as ” Attachment I, Appendix A.”).  It was hoped that the second Civilian military junta…would be able to stabilize the situation in El Salvador… However, violence continued to escalate.  On January 31, 1980, PC Director Celeste made the decision to pull the volunteers . . .

  On February 27th, 13 Volunteers who had been evacuated to Guatemala wrote and signed a letter to Celeste. In the December 27th letter, entitled, “Volunteers Perspectives on the Voluntary Evacuation, December 1979 ((DNSA/GWU, Collection: El Salvador – The Making of U.S. Policy, 1977 – 1984.  Item Number:  ES00340), Volunteers wrote: Dear Mr. Celeste: We are Peace Corps Volunteers from El Salvador, Central America.  We arrived a few days ago in a few days ago in Guatemala on a strong but confusing “suggestion” from the director that we leave El Salvador. We are but a part of the entire Peace Corps Volunteer personel in El Salvador. The others are in the United States, Honduras or are still in-country. Quite naturally we are upset….We recognize the immense strain the Peace Corps Staff, and ourselves, have been functioning under but feel this is a very poor excuse for the inefficient and ineffective . . .

  The memo to the State Department, December 18, 1979,  (DNSA/GWU, Collection: El Salvador – The Making of U.S. Policy, 1977 – 1984. Item Number: ES00326) TO:  Brandon Grove, Deputy Assistant Secretary, ARA FROM:  Richard Celeste, Director, PC SUBJECT;  Peace Corps Presence in El Salvador I have not seen the most recent cables from El Salvador, but it is my understanding that Ambassador Devine first recommended that the Peace Corps reduce its presence in El Salvador to 10 PCVs and 4 or 5 FSN staff members, and that he has subsequently recommended the complete withdrawal of Peace Corps. Although I have asked that Paul Bell continue to discuss this issue with you and Brewster Hemmenway, I do want you to know that I have not agreed to either the “draw-down” to 10 Volunteers, or to the total withdrawal of the Peace Corps from El Salvador, and I intend to appeal . . .

  In an ACTION Memorandum, dated October 16, 1979, (DNSA-GWU Collection: El Salvador: The Making of U.S. Policy 1977 – 1984:  Item Number ES00248) Washington staffer Bill Reese responds to to LAC Regional Director Paul Bell’s, request for suggestions. The memo is entitled: “Some Thoughts on El Salvador, prior to October 1979 Coup.” Reese identifies himself as “Your Devil’s Advocate” but his concerns and suggestions are very serious. Reese argues that there is a need for “contingency plans” beyond just evacuation.  He appears to me to be most concerned with the issues of Peace Corps Trainees. He writes: 2. November PST – STOP. Transferring out PCVs in Oct-Nov to place new Vs in February? The Fall 80 Vs in February will be at their weakest, as all new Vs are that early on: –less than good Spanish –new jobs –no housing, or at best a new neighborhood –less than full . . .

When is a country too dangerous for Peace Corps Volunteers to remain? And who decides? Host Country officials? Peace Corps staff?  Peace Corps Volunteers? Or, the State Department?  These questions are foundational issues for Peace Corps.  The collection, “El Salvador: The Making of U.S. Policy, 1977 -1984” (National Security Archive, George Washington University, Washington D. C)- includes 20 public documents in which we can see how Peace Corps answered these questions during a turbulent time in El Salvador, some 32 years ago.  The website for the National Security Archive is: www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/ Please note: “These materials are reproduced from www.nsarchive.org with the permission of the National Security Archive.” The documents consist of correspondence between Peace Corps in country staff and Peace Corps Washington; between Peace Corps staff and the State Department; and, between Peace Corps Volunteers assigned to El Salvador and Peace Corps Washington. Today, Peace Corps has withdrawn programs from Honduras . . .

These public documents describe the correspondence between Peace Corps and the State Department. The discussion centered on the issues surrounding the closing of El Salvador in 1979 – 1980 to Peace Corps programs.  But, first, for those who are not familiar with the National Security Archive at George Washington University, let me introduce you. The private National Security Archive at George Washington University is a gem, a valuable source of public documents for historians and those of us who would know more about our country’s diplomatic and military history. Many of the documents relate to countries in which Volunteers have served. Visit the website at: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/ From that website: The National Security Archive is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives . . .