is whether they could be better resolved outside rather than inside the ARS.

It may be possible to continue the administration of the NPGS within the ARS. However, the responsibility for oversight of NPGS activities would have to be elevated from the National Program Staff and vested in a director who would report to the administrator of ARS on budgets and program direction.

This change would require an organization that would, to some degree, push aside the present ARS system of area administration. Responsibility for budget, staffing, and program direction would rest with the central office. This change would also obviate the need for the Germplasm Matrix Team, although recommendations on programs could be sought from the National Program Staff as needed to coordinate activities.

The NPGS director should be responsible for formulating an overall budget for the system that would take account of funding and other resources provided by other cooperating agencies (e.g., CSRS, state agricultural experimental stations). In developing a budget, the director should address the concerns and priorities of the national system as identified by the NPGRB. The NPGS budget should be a separate element of the ARS budget, clearly distinguished from other ARS activities. An annual report should be made to the NPGRB by the leader of the NPGS on the effectiveness with which the board's recommendations for budget and program were addressed.

The USDA must develop an NPGS organization with minimal bureaucratic and administrative entanglements and maximal independence. Of the two options, the committee favors creation of a reorganized NPGS outside ARS as the most likely to bring about the positive administrative and advisory changes that it recommends. The second option would perpetuate many of the current administrative constraints on the operation of the NPGS.

Addressing the crucial needs of the NPGS will require significant changes in budget responsibility and in the way the NPGS is organized and managed. The committee cautions the USDA not to respond to these recommendations solely by generating more cooperative or informal agreements. Such agreements are valuable mechanisms for enabling the NPGS to achieve important specific goals, through the sharing of resources and responsibilities among NPGS cooperators. However, they

Front Matter (R1-R16)

Executive Summary (1-20)

1 Managing Crop Genetic Resources (21-42)

2 Elements of the National Plant Germplasm System (43-86)

3 Administration of the National System (87-106)

4 Prescription for Effectiveness (107-144)

References (145-148)

Glossary (149-153)

Abbreviations (154-155)

Authors (156-160)

Index (161-173)