Reports News from the GAO https://www.gao.gov/rss/topic Tue, 05 Nov 2024 04:31:33 -0500 GAO https://www.gao.gov/themes/custom/gao_uswds/img/gao-logo-rss.gif https://www.gao.gov/rss/topic Feed provided by GAO. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106530 What GAO Found The Department of Education can approve relief for student loan borrowers through a process called borrower defense to repayment (borrower defense) if colleges engaged in certain types of misconduct. As of April 30, 2024, Education had discharged (i.e., forgiven) a cumulative total of $17.2 billion in federal student loans for 974,820 borrowers under borrower defense, according to agency data. Under the 1995 and 2016 borrower defense regulations, the agency determines if a borrower qualifies for loan relief using two pathways. Under the first pathway, Education evaluates individual borrower defense applications by following a multistep process to determine if a borrower's claim of a college's misconduct is credible. Under the second pathway, Education provides relief for a group of borrowers. Education uses this “group discharge” process when it determines that a college engaged in widespread and pervasive misconduct. In such cases, Education may provide relief to all borrowers who attended a specific college, campus, or program during a specific time, even if they did not submit applications. The $17.2 billion represents discharges through both the individual and group application pathways. The 974,820 borrowers include those who filed applications as well as those who did not. Education had received a cumulative total of 888,430 borrower defense applications filed by individual borrowers as of April 30, 2024, according to agency data (see figure). All borrowers with approved applications received full relief (i.e., the discharge of outstanding loan(s) to attend the college and a refund of payments made to Education), according to agency data and officials. Borrower Defense Application Outcomes as of April 30, 2024 aEducation may close an application when, for example, the borrower cannot be reached to provide missing information or the borrower's loans were already discharged through other means. bApproved includes 199,020 applications approved through individual adjudication or a group discharge. Eligible for relief includes 217,970 applications found eligible under the terms of a 2022 legal settlement (known as the Sweet settlement). cDenied does not include approximately 137,000 denials that the agency rescinded and will reprocess according to the terms of the Sweet settlement. As of April 30, 2024, Education approved group discharges for seven colleges. According to agency officials, all borrowers in the seven groups received full relief. According to GAO's analysis of agency documents and information from officials, the most common type of misconduct Education found (for six of the seven colleges) was the college misrepresenting its graduates' employment prospects, including job placement rates or expected earnings. Education determined that six of the seven colleges engaged in more than one type of misrepresentation. To assess the allegations, Education used information from various sources, including state attorneys general. Why GAO Did This Study Borrowers may qualify for relief of their federal student loans if their colleges engaged in certain types of misconduct, such as misrepresenting information about the employment prospects of their graduates. The Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, authorized borrower defense, and federal regulations established the process for borrower defense. Borrower defense is designed to protect student loan borrowers. However, the federal government generally bears the cost of discharged and refunded federal student loans. Given the potential cost to the federal government, GAO was asked to review how Education processes borrower defense applications and the outcomes. This report describes the process used to determine student loan relief under borrower defense and the total dollar amount of loans discharged; the number of borrower defense applications Education received and the outcome of those applications; and Education's approval of loan relief for groups of borrowers, among other things. GAO analyzed Education's cumulative borrower defense data as of April 30, 2024, the most recent data available. GAO also reviewed relevant federal laws and regulations, a relevant class-action lawsuit settlement (known as the Sweet settlement), Education policies and procedures, and other agency documents. GAO also interviewed agency officials. For more information, contact Melissa Emrey-Arras at (617) 788-0534 or emreyarrasm@gao.gov. Thu, 24 Oct 2024 07:24:12 -0400 /products/gao-24-106530 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106552 What GAO Found Kindergarten entry assessments (KEA) are one way states and school districts examine children's readiness to learn in a classroom setting. According to responses to GAO's survey from all 50 states and the District of Columbia, 27 states required school districts to administer a KEA during the 2023–2024 school year. Nine states did not require a KEA but reported collecting kindergarten readiness information in another way (such as through literacy or pre-kindergarten assessments). Fifteen states did not collect any kindergarten readiness information at the state level. When asked why they did not collect kindergarten readiness information, the most common reasons cited were that it was local districts' responsibility (four states) or the lack of a legal requirement (three states). States’ Reported Efforts to Collect Kindergarten Readiness Information, 2023–2024 School Year Notes: There is no federal requirement for districts to assess kindergarten readiness for all kindergarten students. All 50 states and the District of Columbia responded to GAO’s survey. Most states that choose to use KEAs require districts to assess multiple areas of kindergarten readiness, especially early literacy, early math, language skills, and social and emotional development, according to GAO's survey. Twenty-two states reported analyzing KEA data aggregated at the state level during the 2022–2023 school year. For example, states examined differences in kindergarten readiness by English learner status (15), disability status (14), or race or ethnicity (14). In terms of how the 22 states used their KEA data, 17 used it to inform the public, and 16 used it to meet state legislative requirements. Teachers in all six of GAO's discussion groups—which were held with kindergarten teachers in six of the states that reported requiring KEAs—stated that administering multiple assessments in the kindergarten year is time consuming. All six discussion groups also said that assessments typically need to be conducted one-on-one, which can take time away from helping students acclimate to school and learn classroom norms, particularly early in the kindergarten year. Most discussion groups also said that it takes time for students to learn the technology used for some assessments and expressed concern that assessments were measuring students' ability to use technology rather than assessing their academic skill base. In all six discussion groups, teachers said they used kindergarten readiness information to identify students in need of additional supports; assign kindergarteners to learning groups, such as reading groups; or understand kindergarteners’ baseline skill levels. Finally, discussion groups noted several challenges with using information from assessments, including concerns about relevance for instruction and accuracy. For example, four groups noted that because some assessments are administered a month or more after classes begin, the results get “stale” quickly and may not accurately represent baseline skills given how quickly kindergarteners learn. Six of the groups also expressed concerns about the accuracy of kindergarten assessment information for some students, such as for kindergarteners who are English language learners. Why GAO Did This Study The early elementary school years are widely understood to be critical to a child developing a strong foundation for future academic success. Kindergarten readiness refers to the skills and abilities children need to succeed in school, including social and emotional development, language acquisition, and physical well-being. States have discretion regarding whether, and how, to collect kindergarten readiness information. Consequently, little is known about kindergarten readiness levels nationwide. GAO was asked to provide information on which states assess children's readiness to learn upon entering kindergarten. This report provides information on state KEA requirements and how states analyze and use kindergarten readiness information for children attending public schools. It also provides information on selected teachers' experiences with administering assessments early in the kindergarten year and using the results, among other topics. GAO surveyed state education and early childhood officials in all 50 states and the District of Columbia and achieved a 100 percent response rate. GAO also held six discussion groups with a total of 30 kindergarten teachers. Each group included kindergarten teachers from one of six states—Alaska, Arizona, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, and North Carolina—selected for geographic diversity among the 27 states that reported KEA requirements. GAO randomly selected kindergarten teachers to recruit within the six discussion group states from a database of teacher contact information. GAO sent invitations to those randomly selected teachers until achieving its goal of recruiting six to eight potential participants for each group. Last, GAO reviewed relevant federal laws. For more information, contact Jacqueline M. Nowicki, (202) 512-7215 or NowickiJ@gao.gov. Thu, 17 Oct 2024 08:02:00 -0400 /products/gao-24-106552 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106913 What GAO Found School districts nationally reported spending a combined total of nearly $60 billion in Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) funds through school year 2021–22, according to GAO's analysis of the Department of Education's (Education) data. About 80 percent of ESSER spending through school year 2021–22 went to addressing students' academic, social, and emotional needs and continuing school operations. For example, most of the districts GAO visited added instructional time and many purchased new curricula. The remaining 20 percent went to addressing physical and mental health concerns, including purchasing cleaning supplies, improving ventilation, and hiring school psychologists. School Districts' Reported Use of K-12 COVID Relief Funds for Activities to Maintain Safe, In-Person Instruction, School Year 2021–22 Note: Percentages do not add to 100 percent because school districts could use funds for multiple activities. Multiple national, state, and district level factors influenced ESSER spending decisions in the 17 school districts across six states GAO visited. For example, the amount of ESSER funds received was a key factor in prioritizing spending for these districts. For some, that meant being able to take care of basic needs while avoiding funding deficits. For others, it meant moving beyond basic needs to making capital improvements or implementing new activities. State officials described their processes for screening and approving districts' proposed uses of ESSER funds. They said they approved proposed activities that demonstrated clear linkage to COVID-related issues. States sometimes differed on what activities they considered allowable under ESSER. Ten of the districts relied on a specific philosophy to guide and prioritize their ESSER spending. For example, one district developed broad pandemic-related goals such as addressing learning loss and ensuring a safe return to school. Officials from 16 districts said they used various data to examine ESSER-funded activities. However, pinpointing the effectiveness of any one individual activity may be difficult because, for example, districts initiated multiple activities during the pandemic. Further, not enough time has passed to know if any initial positive effects will remain long-term. Most district officials also said they began making decisions about whether to sustain, scale, or sunset ESSER-funded activities well before the funding ended. Factors included program results and access to other sources of funding. State officials said they also encouraged school districts to avoid spending that could not be sustained after ESSER funds ended. Why GAO Did This Study The COVID-19 pandemic caused widespread closures and disruption for K-12 schools nationwide. To help address issues related to COVID-19, Congress appropriated nearly $190 billion in ESSER funds, the vast majority of which went to school districts. School districts could generally use ESSER funds for a broad range of purposes designed to prevent, prepare for, or respond to the pandemic (e.g., addressing learning loss or facilitating a safe return to in-person instruction). GAO was asked to review how school districts used their ESSER funds. This report addresses (1) how the nation's school districts spent ESSER funds, (2) factors selected districts considered when prioritizing spending, and (3) how selected districts gauge the effects of their spending and how they are planning for the end of ESSER funding. GAO analyzed Education's ESSER spending data for school years 2020–21 and 2021–22 (most recent data available) nationally and by district characteristics. GAO also conducted site visits to 17 school districts across California, Florida, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and Texas to provide illustrative examples of state and district decision-making regarding ESSER spending. These six states collectively received more than 40 percent of all ESSER funds. GAO selected school districts for variety in urbanicity, enrollment, total ESSER funds received, and student demographics. GAO also reviewed relevant reports from and conducted interviews with Education and national organizations actively monitoring ESSER spending. For more information, contact Jacqueline M. Nowicki at (202) 512-7215 or nowickij@gao.gov. Wed, 23 Oct 2024 07:33:48 -0400 /products/gao-24-106913 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-25-107111 What GAO Found The Department of Education used various methods to communicate with borrowers about resuming their student loan payments in October 2023, following a 3½-year pandemic-related payment pause that began in March 2020. Education provided borrowers with this information through emails, text messages, social media posts, and its website. All of these communications referred borrowers to Education’s StudentAid.gov website as the primary source of information about resuming student loan payments. Education targeted additional outreach to certain borrowers who it determined were at higher risk of late or missed payments. These include borrowers who were entering repayment for the first time or who had a prior history of late or missed payments. Education also provided information about temporary loan relief available to certain borrowers via email, postal mail, and its website. Temporary relief for borrowers who miss payments. Education instituted a 12-month “on-ramp” period from October 1, 2023, to September 30, 2024, during which borrowers could temporarily avoid negative consequences for late or missed payments. Education and its loan servicers notified borrowers that they would not be reported to credit bureaus and their loans would not be considered delinquent if they missed payments during this “on-ramp” period. However, interest on student loans would continue to accrue as normal. Loan servicers also provided additional information to borrowers enrolled in the on-ramp initiative via email and postal mail about options for managing their monthly payment. These options included the availability of affordable repayment plans. Temporary relief for borrowers with defaulted loans. Education established Fresh Start, a temporary program available from April 6, 2022, to October 2, 2024, that allowed borrowers with defaulted loans who signed up to get their loans out of default and restore them to good standing. These borrowers would also gain access to other benefits, including income-driven repayment plans and postponement options to help manage repayment. Education sent emails and postal mail letters to defaulted borrowers outlining the benefits of the program, how to sign up, and the potential negative effects of not signing up, such as collections restarting on their loan. Timeline of Education's Student Loan Payment Pause and Temporary Relief Options, 2020–2024 In June 2024, Education began to implement a plan for communicating with borrowers about the end of both the temporary on-ramp and Fresh Start program. Education sent communications to borrowers in June 2024 and August 2024 and was planning additional borrower communications about the end of these loan relief options for fall 2024. Why GAO Did This Study As of March 2024, Education held $1.5 trillion in outstanding federal student loans for nearly 45 million borrowers. In March 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Education implemented a payment pause for borrowers. This pause suspended all federal student loan payments due, stopped interest from accruing, and halted involuntary collections on loans in default. After several extensions, the payment pause ended on August 30, 2023, as required under the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023. Interest began accruing on these loans in September 2023, and borrowers’ monthly payments resumed in October 2023, according to Education. GAO was asked to address issues related to Education’s communications to borrowers about resuming student loan payments. This report provides information on how Education communicated with borrowers about resuming student loan payments and temporary loan relief options. GAO reviewed Education’s and student loan servicers’ written communication with borrowers and Education’s communication plans. GAO also interviewed Education officials and collected written responses from Education and all four of its student loan servicers. Education provided written comments with additional information about its efforts to support borrowers in resuming repayment. GAO is not making recommendations. For more information, contact Melissa Emrey-Arras at (617) 788-0534 or emreyarrasm@gao.gov. Thu, 10 Oct 2024 08:30:43 -0400 /products/gao-25-107111 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107783 What GAO Found Students and parents can apply for financial aid by completing the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) form and submitting it to the Department of Education's Office of Federal Student Aid (FSA). In February 2021 FSA started an effort to replace the aging system that processes the forms. The subsequent launch of the new system in December 2023 resulted in continuing delays and errors that had troubling impacts on students, parents, and schools, including their ability to plan for the upcoming school year. GAO's preliminary results show that, after awarding the contract for the new FAFSA Processing System (FPS), FSA encountered issues that led to several delays. Specifically, in early 2023, it moved the delivery of 25 key requirements to December 2023. FSA subsequently decided to not address 18 of the 25 key requirements in the launch of FPS. One of the requirements not included was the capability to determine final aid eligibility and distribute those results to schools. GAO's preliminary results indicate that FSA identified and reportedly addressed significant defects prior to deploying FPS. However, the agency also identified numerous defects after deploying the system. Specifically, according to documentation compiled on March 6, 2024, the agency identified 55 defects—including seven that were unresolved and categorized as “critical.” For example, one such critical defect resulted in FSA initially overestimating some students' aid eligibility by erroneously excluding their families' assets from the calculation. The existence of unresolved defects after FPS deployment can be traced, in part, to FSA not ensuring disciplined systems acquisition practices were applied. Define and manage requirements and carry out testing activities. Although FSA established agency guidance to define and manage requirements and carry out testing activities, it did not always follow it. For example, although agency guidance states that a requirements oversight review is to be conducted before development begins, the agency did not conduct this review until more than a year after development had started. In addition, FSA authorized system acceptance testing to begin even though 26 of the 48 readiness indicators were not complete. Carry out independent acquisition reviews. One way to manage the risks in acquiring systems is through independent verification and validation. This is a process conducted by a party independent of the acquisition that provides an assessment of a project's processes, products, and risks throughout its life cycle. However, FSA did not establish or implement guidance to carry out independent verification and validation for FPS. Education's lack of consistent leadership contributed to the difficulties encountered with the FPS acquisition. For example, although Education established processes that give its Chief Information Officer (CIO) a significant role in the governance and oversight processes for IT, it did not follow these processes for FPS. In addition, Education does not have a permanent CIO and has had six CIOs since the FPS project was initiated in February 2021. Until the department addresses these weaknesses, it will be hampered in its ability to make needed improvements to FPS. This could put the 2025-2026 FAFSA cycle at increased risk for experiencing further delays and technical errors. Why GAO Did This Study For decades, FAFSA forms were processed electronically by the legacy Central Processing System. In 2021 FSA initiated a system development effort and in December 2023 deployed a new system to process forms for the 2024-2025 school year. However, student aid applicants reported that the new system had availability issues, recurring errors, and long wait times. This GAO testimony (1) describes the delays in delivering on FPS requirements; (2) describes the defects that were identified before and after FPS deployment; (3) assesses the extent to which disciplined systems acquisition practices were used to manage FPS requirements, conduct systems testing, and carry out independent acquisition reviews; and (4) assesses the extent to which Education and FSA IT leadership provided oversight of FPS development. This statement is a companion to GAO's related statement on the simplified FAFSA rollout (GAO-24-107407). In addressing the first two objectives, GAO summarized the preliminary results of its continuing ongoing work describing delays and defects. For the latter two objectives on requirements, testing, and independent reviews, GAO completed its audit work and is making recommendations to address weaknesses. Tue, 24 Sep 2024 10:05:49 -0400 /products/gao-24-107783 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107407 What GAO Found The Department of Education's rollout of the new simplified Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) was delayed by 3 months from the traditional October launch and hampered by a series of technical problems that blocked some students from completing the application. This contributed to about 9 percent fewer high school seniors and other first-time applicants submitting a FAFSA, with the largest declines among lower-income students, according to Education data as of August 25, 2024. The new process also created additional barriers, including an inefficient process for students' parents or spouses who lacked a Social Security number to verify their identities. This process prevented some families from even accessing the application. Rather than simplifying access to student financial aid—one of the department's strategic goals—the FAFSA rollout created roadblocks for some students and their families. Decline in FAFSA Submissions, Current Compared to Prior Application Cycle Note: Data are through August 25th of each cycle. Education did not consistently provide students with timely and sufficient information or support necessary to complete the new FAFSA. Nearly three-quarters of calls to Education's call center went unanswered during the first 5 months of the rollout due to understaffing. Education also did not provide timely information to students about processing delays or how they could navigate technical problems. For example, Education's guidance instructed call center representatives to advise some students facing technical problems to just “try again later” rather than proactively notifying them when the problem was resolved, which sometimes took months. Education's lack of timely support and clear communications stoked confusion among FAFSA applicants. Total Calls to Education's Call Center, First 5 Months of FAFSA Application Cycle, January-May 2024 Education did not provide colleges with reliable timeframes or communicate changes to colleges in a timely manner. For example, Education did not give colleges any advanced warning that it would not meet promised deadlines for delivering the student records colleges needed to develop aid offers. As a result, colleges were uncertain when they could send aid offers to students as well as when they could disburse student funds. With the next FAFSA application cycle beginning by December 2024, Education still has an opportunity to learn from its recent struggles and make the financial aid process easier for everyone. Why GAO Did This Study The FAFSA is the entry ramp to federal grants and loans that many students depend on to afford college. Congress passed the FAFSA Simplification Act in 2020 in part to make it easier to apply for federal aid. However, Education's rollout of the new FAFSA has suffered from numerous challenges and delays. GAO was asked to review the simplified FAFSA rollout. This statement assesses (1) how Education's rollout of the new FAFSA affected students, (2) the extent to which Education provided students with information and support, and (3) the extent to which Education provided colleges with timely communications. This statement is a companion to GAO's related statement on FAFSA system issues (GAO-24-107783). To conduct this work, GAO analyzed Education data on FAFSA submissions and processing for the current application cycle (2024-25) and comparable data for the prior year. GAO also examined data and performance metrics from Education's call center for the same periods, interviewed Education officials and other key stakeholders from higher education associations and reviewed relevant federal laws and guidance. Tue, 24 Sep 2024 10:19:53 -0400 /products/gao-24-107407 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106787 What GAO Found Among girls, Black girls faced more and harsher forms of discipline than other girls and had the highest rates of exclusionary discipline, such as suspensions and expulsions. According to GAO's analysis of the most recent Department of Education data before the pandemic, in school year 2017–18, Black girls comprised 15 percent of all girls in public schools but received almost half of suspensions and expulsions. Further, GAO's analysis of school year 2017–18 infraction or behavior data showed that Black girls received harsher punishments than White girls even when the infractions that prompted disciplinary action were similar. For example, Black girls had higher rates of exclusionary discipline compared to White girls for similar behaviors such as defiance, disrespect, and disruption. The data also show that in every state in the U.S., Black girls are disciplined at higher rates. When they also had a disability, exclusionary discipline rates of Black girls grew larger. National Rate of Out-of-School Suspension for White Girls Compared to Black Girls GAO's review of empirical studies identified multiple forms of bias as factors that contribute to the higher discipline of Black girls. For example, one study found that adultification—a form of racial and gender bias in which adults view Black girls as older and more promiscuous than their same-age peers—leads to harsher punishments for Black girls. Another study found that colorism—a form of racial bias against those with darker skin—is a factor in disproportionate discipline of girls. Stakeholders GAO interviewed also noted that girls in school are often subject to gender stereotypes that punish girls for failing to conform to traditional expectations of femininity. For example, officials from an organization representing school counselors and psychologists noted that many teachers encourage girls to uphold a quiet, docile form of femininity and “to act like ladies.” GAO's analysis of nationally representative survey data found that over half a million girls (an estimated 5 percent) reported feeling unsafe in school. In addition, Black girls reported feeling less safe in schools than other girls. For example, Black girls more frequently reported that they were afraid of being attacked on school property than White girls. National data also show differences among groups of girls when looking at connectedness, which includes a sense of being supported and belonging at school. For example, more Black girls disagreed that teachers at their schools treat students with respect than White girls or Asian girls and more frequently felt that school rules were unfair. Why GAO Did This Study Federal data show that many girls are struggling across almost all measures of well-being—including substance use, experiences of violence, mental health, and suicidal thoughts and behaviors. Girls' well-being can be affected by their experiences in public schools, and the detrimental effects of removing students from the classroom for discipline (exclusionary discipline). GAO was asked to review the effect of disciplinary policies and practices on girls in U.S. public schools. This report (1) examines what national data show about discipline disparities among girls in K-12 schools across various student characteristics, including race and disability, and school characteristics; (2) identifies factors that contribute to differences in discipline among girls in school; and (3) describes girls' perceptions of safety and belonging in school. To understand discipline patterns for girls, GAO conducted descriptive and regression analyses using 2017–18 Education civil rights data (2020–21 data was anomalous because in-school attendance was affected by COVID-19) and a dataset that captures student infractions and associated disciplinary actions. To identify factors contributing to differences in discipline among girls, GAO reviewed empirical research and interviewed stakeholders specializing in the discipline and experiences of girls in schools. To examine girls' perceptions of safety and belonging in school, GAO analyzed nationally representative survey data from the 2017, 2019 and 2022 National Crime Victimization Surveys, School Crime Supplement. For more information, contact Jacqueline M. Nowicki at (202) 512-7215 or nowickij@gao.gov. Thu, 19 Sep 2024 07:54:55 -0400 /products/gao-24-106787 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106360 What GAO Found English learners—most of whom were born in the U.S.—are a diverse and growing group of students. Between fall 2010 and fall 2020, English learners in U.S. public schools grew from 4.5 million to 5.0 million students. They speak more than 400 languages and represent a wide range of cultures, grade levels, experiences, and backgrounds. GAO's multivariate regression analyses of three Department of Education (Education) data sets identified a variety of student, teacher, and school characteristics associated with English learners' academic performance and progress towards English proficiency. Student characteristics: Characteristics including a student's school experience, demographic, and socioeconomic characteristics were associated with how they performed. For example, having positive feelings about school, being Asian, and being female were associated with higher reading scores. In contrast, feeling disconnected from school, frequent absences, having a disability, and being economically disadvantaged were associated with lower reading scores. Teacher characteristics: For some student groups, having a teacher of the same ethnicity was associated with higher scores in math or reading. Overcrowded classrooms and high levels of teacher absences were significantly associated with lower reading and math scores and less progress towards English proficiency. School characteristics: Characteristics such as school size and socioeconomic composition were associated with English learners' academic performance and progress toward English proficiency. Over time, schools with higher percentages of students enrolled in dual language immersion English instruction were associated with slightly higher rates of growth in reading scores. Why GAO Did This Study The House Committee on Education and the Workforce asked GAO to examine the academic achievement of English learners. Education provides supplemental funding to states to help ensure that English learners attain English proficiency and can meet the same academic standards that all children are expected to meet. As part of its oversight duties, Education collects state, national, and longitudinal data on English learners. To do this work, GAO conducted multivariate regressions using three data sources to explore which student, teacher, and school characteristics were associated with English learners' performance. Regressions are a statistical method that explores whether a relationship exists between two or more variables of interest. For example, a regression can look at whether a relationship exists between poverty and reading scores, while accounting for other factors that may affect the scores. Data Sources on English Learner Performance   Population Covered Years Analysis level Performance indicator(s)   Student Teacher School   EDFacts (State reading and English proficiency assessments) All K-12 public schools 2018, 2019, 2021     X Percent of students proficient in English Percent making progress towards English proficiency National Assessment of Educational Progress (National assessments) Sample of 4th and 8th grade students 2019 X X X Score on national reading and math assessments Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey (Longitudinal study) Sample cohort of kindergartners through fifth grade (2010-11 cohort) 2010-2016 X X X Growth in reading score over time Source: GAO summary of information from the U.S. Department of Education, The National Center for Education Statistics, within the department’s Institute of Education Sciences. | GAO-24-106360 For more information, contact Jacqueline M. Nowicki at (202) 512-7215 or NowickiJ@gao.gov. Mon, 26 Aug 2024 10:18:19 -0400 /products/gao-24-106360 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107485 This electronic supplement serves as a companion to GAO's report entitled, K-12 Education: Student, Teacher, and School Characteristics Associated with English Learners' Academic Performance, GAO-24-106360. This supplement presents technical information about regression analyses of three Department of Education Datasets. For more information, contact Jacqueline M. Nowicki at (202) 512-7215 or NowickiJ@gao.gov. Mon, 26 Aug 2024 10:20:23 -0400 /products/gao-24-107485 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107150 What GAO Found Since federal student loan payments resumed in October 2023 after a 3½ year pause due to the COVID-19 pandemic, about half of borrowers in repayment (17.8 million) were current on their loan payments as of January 31, 2024. These borrowers accounted for approximately $706 billion in loans. Number of Federal Student Loan Borrowers in Repayment by Status, as of January 31, 2024 aBoth deferment and forbearance allow eligible borrowers to temporarily postpone making payments. Deferment is available to borrowers who meet certain requirements, such as active-duty military service or returning to school. Forbearance is available to borrowers experiencing financial difficulties or who meet certain requirements, such as serving in AmeriCorps or the National Guard.bPast-due borrowers were one or more days late. Note: Borrowers may have loans in more than one status. As a result, the sum of borrowers in the different loan statuses (33.2 million) is slightly higher than the unduplicated number of borrowers (32.2 million). Numbers may not add to 100 due to rounding. IDR plans are income-driven repayment plans. Current borrowers. About 40 percent of borrowers (13.3 million) were current on their payments and had scheduled payments of more than $0. In addition, about 14 percent of borrowers (4.5 million) were current and scheduled to pay $0 on income-driven repayment (IDR) plans. IDR plans base monthly payments on a borrower's income and family size and offer forgiveness of any remaining balance at the end of the repayment period. Scheduled monthly payments on IDR plans can be as low as $0 and still count toward forgiveness at the end of the repayment period. Past-due borrowers. Nearly 30 percent of borrowers (9.7 million) were past due on their payments and accounted for $290 billion in outstanding loans. The Department of Education typically reports borrowers as delinquent to credit reporting agencies when they become 90 days past due on their loans, but the agency is forgoing this practice for the first 12 months of repayment resumption—October 2023 to September 2024. As of January 31, 2024, Education reported that nearly 6.7 million borrowers had been shielded from negative credit reporting since monthly payments resumed. Borrowers in deferment and forbearance. The remaining borrowers were not expected to make payments because their loans were in deferment (10 percent) or forbearance (7 percent), temporary options available to eligible borrowers based on factors such as enrollment in school or financial hardship. These borrowers had outstanding loans totaling about $254 billion. Nearly a quarter of borrowers in repayment (7.3 million) were enrolled in Education's newest IDR plan, the Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) repayment plan, as of January 31, 2024. SAVE generally offers borrowers lower payments. Among the 6.2 million borrowers enrolled in SAVE who had scheduled monthly payments, nearly 60 percent (3.6 million) were scheduled to pay $0, as of January 31, 2024. On July 18, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit granted an emergency motion for a stay temporarily prohibiting Education from implementing the SAVE plan. On July 19, 2024, Education announced that borrowers enrolled in the SAVE plan would be placed in an interest-free forbearance while the litigation was ongoing. Why GAO Did This Study Federal student loans are an important resource to help individuals access higher education. As of January 2024, Education held $1.5 trillion in outstanding federal student loans for nearly 43 million borrowers, according to Education. Beginning in March 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the CARES Act and related administrative actions paused several aspects of student loan repayment, including payments being due and interest accrual. After several extensions, this payment pause ended on August 30, 2023, per the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023. Interest began accruing again in September 2023, and monthly payments resumed in October 2023. GAO was asked to examine borrower repayment practices after the student loan payment pause. This report describes the extent to which (1) borrowers were current on their student loan payments and (2) borrowers enrolled in the SAVE repayment plan. To answer these questions, GAO reviewed summary data and documentation from Education on (1) borrowers' payment statuses from October 2023 through January 2024 and (2) borrower participation in IDR plans, including SAVE, as of the end of January 2024. GAO also solicited information from Education officials and reviewed relevant federal laws and regulations. Education provided written comments with additional information about its efforts to support borrowers resuming repayment. GAO is not making recommendations. For more information, contact Melissa Emrey-Arras at 617-788-0534 or emreyarrasm@gao.gov. Wed, 14 Aug 2024 07:07:57 -0400 /products/gao-24-107150 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106875 What GAO Found The U.S. Merchant Marine Academy (Academy) is the nation's only federal service academy dedicated to training licensed mariners to support domestic and international trade and the transport needs of the U.S. military. It is operated by the Maritime Administration, which is part of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Since 2022, DOT has made several changes to the management of facilities and infrastructure at the Academy that have contributed to recent progress in addressing campus needs, including: - DOT and the Maritime Administration established two oversight bodies to review and approve capital projects and help ensure that those projects address the campus's needs; - DOT detailed a senior executive to temporarily serve as the lead official for facilities and infrastructure improvements on campus; and - The Academy combined its maintenance and capital planning departments to improve communication and coordination on improvements. Since 2022, the Academy completed three capital improvement projects, including renovating an athletic field, and has work underway on four others. This includes restarting construction on a long-delayed renovation of Samuels Hall, which houses the campus's simulator to train midshipmen on vessel navigation. The Maritime Administration and the Academy have also begun developing a long-range master plan for the campus, which they plan to complete by December 2024. However, GAO found the progress made thus far at the Academy is fragile because (1) DOT and the Maritime Administration have not established continuous leadership at the Academy to manage facilities and infrastructure improvements and (2) the Academy and the Maritime Administration have not conducted strategic workforce planning to determine the needed skills and capabilities for the Academy's Office of Facilities and Infrastructure. Focused attention from DOT on these issues could help ensure that the Academy has the dedicated leadership, resources, and skills to address long-standing challenges with campus conditions. GAO also found that the Academy does not have policies establishing how it estimates costs for capital improvements, and that the Academy's cost estimates for two new projects—to manage stormwater and to repair and rehabilitate the campus seawall—do not reflect cost estimating best practices. Developing such policies and procedures would give the Academy the tools necessary to assess the costs of its forthcoming master plan and could help the Academy establish priorities for implementing that plan. Why GAO Did This Study Numerous reports have been issued since at least 2010 documenting poor and deteriorating conditions on the Academy's campus. In November 2021, in response to a statutory requirement, the National Academy of Public Administration issued a report that identified a wide range of facility and infrastructure problems on the campus and recommended changes to oversight and management. The James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 includes a provision for GAO to review capital improvement efforts at the Academy. (Pub. L. No. 117-263, § 3516, 136 Stat. 2395, 3073 (2022)). This report examines progress addressing the Academy's facility and infrastructure issues. DOT agreed with GAO's recommendations. Tue, 06 Aug 2024 09:16:02 -0400 /products/gao-24-106875 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106264 What GAO Found All 32 entities GAO visited—including 16 school districts, four state educational agencies, and 12 special education organizations across four states—said personnel shortages were a key obstacle to educating students with disabilities. This is consistent with GAO's 2022 work on teacher shortages, which showed a nationwide shortage of special education teachers. Other obstacles cited by officials in most districts were insufficient time for professional development, challenges communicating with parents, and insufficient collaboration between general and special education staff. The snowball effect of these obstacles may result in some students not receiving needed education and services (see figure). Officials said some students do not receive high-quality education, some receive delayed services, and some do not receive services at all. State and school district officials described strategies to mitigate these obstacles, including mentorship programs and ways to grow the teacher pipeline. Snowball Effect of Reported Obstacles to Educating Students with Disabilities Department of Education data showed that many students with disabilities attend schools without key personnel. In the 2021–22 school year, just 20 percent of public-school students with disabilities attended a school having a social worker, school psychologist, school nurse, and counselor. GAO also found variation across states in student with disabilities-to-staff ratios (ranging from 9 to 1 in one state to 30 to 1 in another). Although research suggests that resources are often distributed unequally across schools within districts, most data—such as the number of certain special education staff—are not available at the school level. These data gaps hinder Education's ability to assess the distribution of resources in its efforts to address a stated purpose of IDEA. Education officials told GAO that, in general, they do not have the statutory authority to collect such data. By granting Education authority to collect school- and district-level data, Congress could enable Education to better assess how special education resources are distributed at these levels, and why any disparities exist. Why GAO Did This Study During school year 2021–22, around 7.3 million children ages 3 through 21 received special education and related services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This act is the primary federal special education law for children and youth with disabilities. Last reauthorized in 2004, IDEA was enacted to ensure access to a free appropriate public education for all children with disabilities. One of IDEA's stated purposes is to assess, and ensure the effectiveness of, efforts to educate children with disabilities. GAO was asked to review obstacles to providing special education and how the distribution of resources for educating students with disabilities varies across states and school districts. This report addresses obstacles to educating students with disabilities and efforts to mitigate those obstacles, as well the availability of resources for special education. GAO visited states and school districts selected based on experts' recommendations of states with notable strategies for providing special education. GAO interviewed Education officials and analyzed the most recent available national data on special education resources and expenditures. Mon, 29 Jul 2024 14:02:02 -0400 /products/gao-24-106264 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107074 What GAO Found An estimated 23 percent of college students (3.8 million) experienced food insecurity in 2020, according to GAO's analysis of student data from the Department of Education's National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS). The U.S. Department of Agriculture defines the range of food security to include high, marginal, low, and very low, and it categorizes those with low or very low food security as food insecure. Among food insecure students in 2020, a majority (2.2 million) had very low food security, meaning they reported multiple instances of eating less than they should or skipping meals because they could not afford enough food. SNAP benefits are available to eligible low-income households to help them pay for food. For students to qualify for SNAP, they must meet additional student-specific criteria, such as working at least 20 hours a week at a paid job. Using available Education data, GAO estimated that fewer than two in five food insecure students met the criteria to be potentially eligible for SNAP. Of these students, 59 percent did not report receiving SNAP benefits in 2020. Estimated Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Receipt among Potentially Eligible College Students, 2020 aThe 95 percent confidence interval is within a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points. Why GAO Did This Study In fiscal year 2023, the federal government spent approximately $31.4 billion dollars on Pell Grants to help over 6 million students with financial need go to college. This substantial federal investment in higher education is at risk of not serving its intended purpose if college students drop out because of limited or uncertain access to food. Some studies have found that food insecurity negatively affects students' academic success. Certain students are eligible for SNAP—the nation's largest nutrition assistance program available to low-income households. Given the substantial federal investment in higher education, GAO was asked to review newly available Education data on food insecurity among a nationally representative sample of college students. This report, which is the first of two reports on college student food insecurity, describes what Education's NPSAS data show about food insecurity among college students and their access to SNAP benefits. GAO's estimates are based on 2020 NPSAS data, which were the most recent available. For more information, contact Kathryn Larin at (202) 512-7215 or larink@gao.gov. Wed, 24 Jul 2024 08:33:03 -0400 /products/gao-24-107074 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106294 What GAO Found GAO's analysis of the Department of Education's data collected from nearly every U.S. school district found that students' race and ethnicity, gender, and disability status were all prominent with respect to rates of arrest and referrals to police, especially when the characteristics intersected. Specifically, in school year 2017–2018, the most recent year of data prior to the pandemic, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Black, and American Indian/Alaska Native students were arrested at rates that were two to three times higher than White students. For boys who had a disability, the differences in arrest rates widened further. Arrest Rates for K-12 Student Groups Compared to National Average for All K-12 Students, School Year 2017–2018 Note: For more details, see fig. 3 in GAO-24-106294. “With disability” refers to students that receive services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Education's guidance explains that when race, gender, and disability status intersect, students might experience discrimination due to the combination of protected characteristics. Yet, Education does not collect arrest and referral data by race for students receiving services only under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. Section 504 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by recipients of federal funding. Education officials said to date, they believe the burden on districts outweighs the benefit; however, they also said they always reevaluate what data they collect and will reconsider collecting such data for the 2025-2026 data collection. Having this data is important; as GAO's analysis shows, the intersection of particular characteristics affects student arrest rates. Also, Education modified the arrest definition for school year 2021–2022, but did not tell districts about the new definition before they collected the data. This raises the risk that districts used the old definition, which could affect data quality. Disclosing data limitations also aids those that use the data. Arrest rates more than doubled in schools with police present compared to similar schools without police, according to GAO's analysis. Among the 51 percent of schools with police present at least once a week, GAO found that arrests were more common when the police were involved in student discipline. Why GAO Did This Study The Departments of Education and Justice are responsible for enforcing certain federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in K-12 schools based on characteristics such as race, sex, and disability, including regarding police interactions with students. The House committee report for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2023, includes a provision for GAO to review the role of policing in schools, including the effect on students of different races. This report addresses (1) what Education's data show about the extent to which different student groups are arrested in K-12 schools and (2) whether police presence in schools is associated with student arrests. GAO analyzed two federal Education datasets for the two most recent school years before the pandemic (2015–2016 and 2017–2018) and 2019–2020. GAO also visited three school districts, selected for factors such as high rates of arrests; reviewed federal laws and regulations; and interviewed federal officials and representatives of national education and civil rights groups. Mon, 08 Jul 2024 08:00:12 -0400 /products/gao-24-106294 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107661 What GAO Found From fiscal years 2011 through 2021, about 20,000 complaints alleging employment discrimination at an institution of higher education were filed by faculty or other employees, according to GAO's analysis of complaint data from the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Allegations of discrimination included complaints based on race, sex, disability, national origin, color, and religion. OCR received 1,944 complaints from fiscal years 2011 through 2022. OCR investigates complaints that meet its criteria, but refers the majority of its employment-related complaints to EEOC for investigation consideration. EEOC investigated 18,559 complaints of employment discrimination against higher education institutions from faculty or other employees from fiscal years 2011 through 2021. Education and EEOC have processes in place to respond to employment discrimination complaints and coordinate referrals, but GAO found that the referral process was often delayed and sometimes resulted in missing records. In fiscal year 2022, Education processed and referred to EEOC 99 complaints alleging employment discrimination at colleges and universities. GAO found that Education referred the complaints in 71 days on average, although Education policy calls for doing so within 30 days. However, Education does not track the timing of these referrals. Without doing so, Education is missing opportunities to identify and learn from its field offices that are processing timely referrals. Lessons learned could be applied agency-wide to reduce delays. This is important because individuals with delayed complaints may experience adverse effects, such as continued discrimination or less pay. In fiscal year 2021, EEOC processed 1,342 complaints alleging employment discrimination at colleges or universities based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or disability, some of which were referred by Education. However, EEOC does not have a protocol to consistently track and account for the complaint referrals, which can sometimes result in missing referrals. EEOC acknowledged that it could not locate all OCR referrals. For example, one recent referral from OCR was not initially recorded by EEOC until the individual who filed the complaint followed up. Without a protocol to ensure that EEOC receives and processes all Education complaint referrals, some may be missed or resolution may be delayed. Why GAO Did This Study Colleges and universities employ thousands of faculty and staff across the country. These institutions are subject to federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. However, some faculty and other employees have reported experiencing discrimination. This testimony is based on relevant aspects of GAO's March 2024 report, entitled Higher Education: Employment Discrimination Case Referrals between Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Could Be Improved (GAO-24-105516). This testimony addresses the roles of Education's OCR and EEOC and how they process complaints of employment discrimination at higher education institutions. GAO analyzed Education complaint data from fiscal years 2011–2022, and EEOC complaint data from fiscal years 2011–2021 (each data set was the most recent available). GAO also reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and policies, and interviewed agency officials. Wed, 26 Jun 2024 10:04:12 -0400 /products/gao-24-107661 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106641 What GAO Found College athletes are part of a sports culture that may make it difficult for them to report sexual harassment and violence, according to college officials and athletes GAO interviewed. For example, athletes may be reluctant to report because they fear being ostracized or jeopardizing a scholarship. Research is mixed on whether sexual harassment and violence is more prevalent among college athletes than the general college student population. To address sexual harassment and violence, selected colleges included in GAO's study focused on training athletes and others on how to recognize and report it. In addition, these colleges reported focusing on providing support to those affected by sexual harassment and violence, such as offering counseling and arranging for students to re-do or make up coursework. Colleges also reported implementing procedures required under Title IX regulations to investigate and resolve allegations of sexual harassment. Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) enforces Title IX and its implementing regulations primarily by investigating complaints, such as those that allege a college was deliberately indifferent to a report of sexual harassment. OCR also provides information and guidance to help colleges understand Title IX's implementing regulations. Education recently published revised regulations with an effective date of August 1, 2024. The revised regulations define sex-based harassment and specify requirements for associated grievance procedures and training, among other things. OCR officials said they will consider additional needs colleges may have for Title IX information and guidance, if any. Why GAO Did This Study High-profile cases at multiple colleges have raised concerns about sexual harassment and violence against athletes. Some cases involved hundreds of athletes, and alleged perpetrators included coaches, team doctors, and other athletes. Those affected were of different genders in sports such as football, gymnastics, and wrestling. Sexual harassment and violence can inflict lifelong trauma, ruin athletic careers, and adversely affect educational achievements. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 generally prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance, including colleges. The U.S. Department of Education's regulations implementing Title IX outline how recipients are to respond to sexual harassment, including sexual violence, in their education programs or activities. GAO was asked to review issues related to sexual harassment and violence against college athletes. This report examines barriers for athletes in reporting sexual harassment and violence to their colleges, how selected colleges address sexual harassment and violence in athletic programs, and the extent Education monitors colleges' compliance with related Title IX regulations. To examine barriers for athletes in reporting sexual harassment and violence to their colleges and how selected colleges address sexual harassment and violence in athletic programs, GAO interviewed four groups: Education officials; representatives from five research, advocacy, sports, and other organizations; officials from 10 colleges in four states; and 13 athletes from the selected colleges. GAO selected the 10 colleges for a variety of factors such as the size of the athletics program and geographic location. To identify the 13 athletes, GAO worked with officials and student leadership groups at the selected colleges and interviewed at least two athletes per state. To examine the extent Education monitors colleges' compliance with related Title IX regulations, GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and Education information and guidance, and analyzed data on complaints filed with Education's Office for Civil Rights. For more information, contact Kathryn A. Larin at (202) 512-7215 or LarinK@gao.gov. Thu, 20 Jun 2024 10:53:05 -0400 /products/gao-24-106641 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107376 What GAO Found States must ensure school districts take appropriate action to overcome language barriers that impede equal participation in instruction. School districts generally use a home language survey to identify students who might be English learners. This survey is administered to families when children first enroll in a school. As of fall 2020, English learners accounted for about 10.1 percent of all K-12 public school students. In school year 2021–2022, 15.8 percent of English learners were children with one or more disabilities, according to Department of Education data. On GAO's survey of all 50 states and the District of Columbia (states), 48 states reported using a set of three Education-suggested questions in their home language surveys to some extent. Thirty-two states reported taking steps to assess the quality of their process for identifying English learners. The most common step was to assess the policies, procedures, and guidelines related to identification. Most states (41 states) reported providing recent assistance to schools, districts, or both to help them distinguish between students having language acquisition issues, specific learning disabilities, or a speech language impairment. Of these, 17 reported taking steps to determine how well schools, districts, or both made these distinctions. Why GAO Did This Study GAO was asked to examine how states and districts identify students who are English learners and ensure that they are accurately identifying those who are English learners with disabilities. GAO's review examined how states ensure the effectiveness of their home language surveys and the extent to which states help school districts properly identify English learners who have disabilities. To do this work, GAO surveyed all 50 states and the District of Columbia and received responses from all but Utah. The survey asked questions about the characteristics and the effectiveness of state screening tools that school districts use to identify English learners and the assistance that states provide to help school districts identify English learners who have disabilities. GAO also interviewed representatives of four states—California, Delaware, Massachusetts, and Nevada—selected because they have relatively large populations of students who are English learners. GAO also interviewed experts on English learners to obtain additional information about the identification of English learners, including those with disabilities. For more information, contact Jacqueline M. Nowicki at (202) 512-7215 or NowickiJ@gao.gov. Mon, 17 Jun 2024 09:02:00 -0400 /products/gao-24-107376 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-105614 What GAO Found The percentage of college students with disabilities has increased since 2004 according to GAO's analysis of Department of Education data (see figure). The increase is largely driven by more students reporting mental health conditions or attention deficit disorder. Students with disabilities graduated from college at lower rates than those without disabilities. Further, those with disabilities who did graduate were less likely to be employed full-time than peers without disabilities. Estimated Percentage of College Students by Disability Status, 2004–2020 Note: “College students” includes undergraduates from postsecondary institutions of all types. Estimates are within a 1 percent margin of error. Students with disabilities face several challenges while transitioning to and attending college, according to college disability services staff and students GAO spoke with. For example, some students are unaware of or unprepared for the self-advocacy necessary to request accommodations without help from their parents, who can play a pivotal role in obtaining academic supports in high school. In addition, some students experience reluctance from faculty to provide accommodations. To help mitigate these challenges, college staff reported holding orientation sessions for students on how to request accommodations and training faculty on how to make their courses accessible, among other steps. Education has also taken steps to help address challenges faced by college students with disabilities. Education provides a range of supports including guidance, technical assistance, grants, and other resources. Education's priorities and federal standards highlight the need for prompt communication of guidance and other information affecting college students with disabilities. However, college staff GAO spoke with identified information gaps. For example: Education has issued guidance materials on the importance of self-advocacy for students with disabilities in college, but this information may not reach students transitioning from high school. By encouraging state and local educational agencies to disseminate resources about the need for self-advocacy to assist students who wish to attend college, Education could help ensure that college students with disabilities are prepared to obtain needed accommodations. Education does not provide notifications to college staff of newly issued guidance and other information about accommodations for students with disabilities, despite notifications on other topics. As a result, college staff report difficulties staying current on information that could help them support students with disabilities. Why GAO Did This Study Research suggests that more students with disabilities are pursuing college than in years past. GAO was asked to review issues regarding accessibility and accommodations for students with disabilities at colleges. This report examines (1) trends in and characteristics of the population of college students with disabilities, (2) any challenges to accessing education that students with disabilities face in college and how colleges have mitigated them, and (3) the extent to which Education helps mitigate these challenges. GAO analyzed the most recent data from three of Education's nationally representative surveys. GAO also held eight discussion groups with college students, faculty, and disability services staff and interviewed Education officials. Colleges were selected for institutional variety (e.g., public and private). GAO also reviewed recent academic reports, relevant federal laws, and pertinent guidance documents. Wed, 29 May 2024 07:29:51 -0400 /products/gao-24-105614 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107296 What GAO Found In May 2023, GAO identified six priority recommendations for the Department of Education. Since then, Education implemented one recommendation by issuing a study on the effectiveness of federal student aid programs under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to improve student outcomes. As of May 2024, GAO is not adding any new priority recommendations this year. The five remaining priority recommendations involve the following areas: protecting the investment in higher education, and ensuring the well-being and education of the nation's school-age children. Education's attention to these issues could lead to significant improvements in government operations. Why GAO Did This Study Priority open recommendations are the GAO recommendations that warrant priority attention from heads of key departments or agencies because their implementation could save large amounts of money; improve congressional and/or executive branch decision-making on major issues; eliminate mismanagement, fraud, and abuse; or ensure that programs comply with laws and funds are legally spent, among other benefits. Since 2015 GAO has sent letters to selected agencies to highlight the importance of implementing such recommendations. For more information, contact Cindy Brown Barnes at (202) 512-7215 or brownbarnesc@gao.gov. Tue, 28 May 2024 09:40:45 -0400 /products/gao-24-107296 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-105994 What GAO Found GAO found that more women enroll in college than men, but more men participate in varsity college athletics. The overall athletic participation rate for women was 14 percentage points lower than their enrollment rate in academic year 2021–2022. At about two-thirds of colleges (63 percent), the rate of women's athletic participation was at least 10 percentage-points lower than their enrollment rate. Further, 40 percent of colleges not only had a large difference between women's athletic participation and enrollment rates, but also offered the same number or fewer varsity sports for women in academic year 2021–2022 compared to 2009–2010. Women Participated in Varsity College Athletics at a Lower Rate Compared to Their Enrollment Rate, Academic Year 2021–2022 Note: For purposes of collecting athletics data, the Department of Education instructs colleges to report transgender participants consistent with their gender identity. GAO found that Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) oversees compliance with Title IX athletics requirements primarily by investigating complaints and it conducts few proactive activities. Specifically: OCR uses Education athletics data on scholarships and participation to help select colleges for the small number of athletics reviews it initiates, but does not use the data to inform other oversight activities. Analyzing data regularly and expanding its use of data could help OCR do more proactive oversight. After obtaining formal agreements from colleges to address potential Title IX compliance issues, OCR did not always communicate with colleges and respond to their monitoring reports in a timely way. In some cases GAO reviewed, OCR took more than a year to review and approve a college's plans to address potential compliance issues. In 10 of 26 cases GAO reviewed, OCR did not communicate with the college for a year or more. In five other cases, there was no communication for 5 or more years. Such delays can prevent colleges from addressing compliance concerns. Establishing agency timeliness goals for monitoring activities could help OCR respond to colleges in a more timely way and help ensure that colleges promptly address potential compliance issues. OCR does not require staff to record due dates for responding to colleges they monitor, and staff do not always enter this information in OCR's management system. This limits OCR's ability to track its responses and ensure that colleges address potential compliance issues in a timely way. Why GAO Did This Study Title IX prohibits sex discrimination in educational programs that receive federal financial assistance, including college athletics programs. OCR is responsible for enforcing Title IX by investigating complaints, negotiating agreements with colleges to address concerns, and monitoring agreements. GAO was asked to review opportunities for women college athletes. This report examines (1) college athletic opportunities for women and (2) the extent to which Education oversees compliance with Title IX college athletics requirements. GAO analyzed the most recent available Education data reported by colleges for academic year 2021–2022 and analyzed OCR case management data for academic years 2008–2009 through 2021–2022, the most recent data available. GAO reviewed documentation for a nongeneralizable sample of 26 of 79 publicly available OCR athletics cases, selected to include a variety of athletics issues. GAO also interviewed Education officials and college athletic stakeholder groups, and reviewed federal laws and regulations. Thu, 09 May 2024 09:08:39 -0400 /products/gao-24-105994 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106381 What GAO Found Older adults and people with disabilities face financial decisions that can have lasting consequences for their financial well-being. They often must navigate government benefits, such as Social Security and Medicare; make housing decisions; manage retirement savings; and avoid fraudulent schemes. GAO found 24 examples of federal financial literacy programs and resources designed to help older adults and people with disabilities with financial decision-making. Examples include a curriculum for preventing elder financial exploitation, a website with information on employment for people with disabilities, and a hotline that provides information on retirement, disability, and other benefits. Federal Financial Literacy Programs for Older Adults and People with Disabilities The Financial Literacy and Education Improvement Act established the Financial Literacy and Education Commission—which comprises the heads of 24 federal agencies and entities—to improve financial literacy and education through coordinated federal efforts. It does so through working groups, public meetings, and coordination on financial literacy programs and resources. The Department of the Treasury and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau serve as the chair and vice chair, respectively, of the Commission, which primarily communicates information on its efforts through its annual reports to Congress. Of the 24 financial literacy programs GAO identified that serve older adults and people with disabilities, the Commission's five annual reports from fiscal years 2015 to 2022 included program outcome data for one. The reports contain similarly limited outcome information for other financial literacy programs. The Commission's national strategy highlights the importance of collecting data on the outcomes of financial education activities to assess their impacts and inform data-driven improvements. Further, GAO's prior work has shown that evidence-based policymaking is important for effective program management. Enhanced focus on outcome reporting for federal financial literacy efforts could provide the Commission and Congress with more robust information to facilitate oversight of federal financial literacy efforts. More information could also help member agencies assess program effectiveness and help Congress determine how agencies' efforts are meeting the needs of specific groups, such as older adults and people with disabilities. Why GAO Did This Study Financial literacy—the ability to make informed decisions and take effective actions regarding money—is essential to helping ensure the financial health and stability of individuals and families. Financial literacy is particularly important for older adults and people with disabilities. Many federal agencies promote financial literacy through programs and resources such as print and online materials. GAO was asked to report on federal financial literacy programs for older adults and people with disabilities. This report addresses (1) financial decisions older adults and people with disabilities face and federal resources available to help improve their financial literacy, and (2) how the Financial Literacy and Education Commission coordinates financial literacy efforts and reports program outcomes to Congress and the public. GAO reviewed agency strategic plans, annual reports, websites, and other materials, and interviewed representatives of federal agencies and relevant organizations, such as the AARP and National Disability Institute. Wed, 24 Apr 2024 08:27:43 -0400 /products/gao-24-106381 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-105516 What GAO Found The proportions of Black or African American (Black) and Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) college faculty increased from fiscal years 2003 through 2021. Yet, there were lower proportions of Black and Hispanic college faculty compared to Black and Hispanic workers with advanced degrees (e.g., master's and doctorate) and professional workers (e.g., lawyers and engineers), according to GAO's analysis of Department of Education and Census Bureau data. Black and Hispanic individuals were also less represented among college faculty than among students, according to GAO's analysis of Education data. For example, in fiscal year 2021, 8 percent of faculty were Black compared to 12 percent of students, and 7 percent of faculty were Hispanic compared to 19 percent of students. College Faculty and Students by Race and Ethnicity, Fiscal Year 2021 Notes: Black refers to Black or African American. Hispanic refers to Hispanic or Latino. An individual who self-identifies as Hispanic only, or both Hispanic and any race category, would be classified as Hispanic. The Other category includes individuals such as those that identified as Native American, Pacific Islander, multiple races, or unknown race. GAO's literature search identified strategies used by colleges to recruit and retain a diverse faculty, given the potential benefits to their students. Colleges have enhanced their job search processes, developed mentoring programs, and improved campus climate to recruit and retain a diverse faculty. Education refers certain employment discrimination complaints against colleges to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for investigation consideration but has been consistently late in doing so. In fiscal year 2022, Education processed and referred to EEOC 99 complaints alleging employment discrimination at colleges based on race, color, national origin, or sex. GAO found that Education referred the complaints in 71 days on average, although Education policy calls for doing so in 30 days. However, Education does not track the timing of these referrals. Without doing so, Education could miss an opportunity to learn from offices that are more timely than others and apply those lessons agency-wide to reduce delays. Individuals with delayed complaints may experience adverse effects, such as continued discrimination or less pay. In fiscal year 2021, EEOC processed 1,342 complaints alleging employment discrimination at colleges based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or disability, some of which were referred by Education. However, EEOC does not have a protocol to consistently track and account for the complaint referrals. Recently, one such referral was not initially received by EEOC until the individual who filed the complaint followed up. Without a protocol to ensure that EEOC receives and processes all Education complaint referrals, some may be missed or resolution may be delayed. Why GAO Did This Study While the U.S. population has become increasingly diverse, college faculty may not reflect those same levels of diversity. Little is known at the national level about the relationship between faculty diversity and student outcomes. Separately, faculty have reported experiencing discrimination at colleges. GAO was asked to review faculty diversity and employment discrimination at colleges. This report examines (1) selected aspects of diversity among faculty, (2) efforts by colleges to recruit and retain a diverse faculty, and (3) how Education and EEOC process employment discrimination complaints at colleges. GAO analyzed Education data on faculty and students from fiscal years 2003–2021, national workforce data from the Census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics ranging from calendar years 2014–2021, Education complaint data from fiscal years 2011–2022, and EEOC complaint data from fiscal years 2011–2021 (each set was the most recent available). GAO also conducted literature reviews; reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and policies; and interviewed agency officials and selected higher education experts. Tue, 09 Apr 2024 08:33:34 -0400 /products/gao-24-105516 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-105451 What GAO Found The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) and its schools used federal COVID-19 relief funds mainly to support distance learning and prevent the spread of COVID-19 in schools. For example, BIE spent nearly $60 million of its COVID funds on IT and broadband supports for schools, including student laptops and Wi-Fi equipment for distance learning. Similarly, nearly all of the 70 BIE schools that responded to GAO's survey reported prioritizing their COVID funds for laptops and tablets and for personal protective equipment, cleaning supplies, and COVID tests. Schools generally reported that BIE offered regular guidance and support for spending COVID funds. BIE uses several processes to monitor schools' COVID spending, including reviewing schools' single audit reports, overseeing schools at high risk of financial mismanagement, and monitoring schools' purchase card use for fraud and misuse. However, GAO found that due to insufficient controls, BIE staff did not consistently follow these processes, which limited accountability for use of COVID funds. For example, a little over a quarter of required fiscal year 2021 single audit reports for schools and Tribes that received BIE grant funds were late or not submitted as of November 2023. But BIE did not follow agency standard procedures for applying or increasing financial conditions for 19 of the 28 grantees that failed to submit a timely single audit report that year. Without timely single audit reports, BIE lacks vital information for overseeing schools' financial management. Further, BIE did not conduct sufficient oversight of high-risk schools' COVID spending and lacked the staff capacity to complete all required monitoring. Such oversight is critical for helping schools correct errors and avoid them in the future. Finally, GAO found that for BIE-operated schools, nearly half of COVID fund spending with purchase cards between March 2020 and August 2022 involved elevated risk transactions according to agency data (see figure). Examples of elevated risk transactions include the purchase of gift cards or multiple purchases at the same merchant within a certain number of days that total more than the single purchase limit. However, BIE did not provide evidence that it had investigated these transactions for fraud or misuse. Bureau of Indian Education Schools' COVID Fund Spending with Purchase Cards, March 2020 to August 2022 In addition, GAO found that BIE staff did not consistently use the required tool or procedures for tracking and investigating suspicious transactions. Without addressing these gaps in its oversight of schools' COVID spending, BIE cannot ensure that schools will use remaining COVID funds appropriately to provide students the support they need. Why GAO Did This Study Many of BIE's 183 schools are located in remote tribal lands that faced extraordinary challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic and continue to experience ongoing effects. Congress appropriated about $1.5 billion to help BIE and its schools respond to the pandemic. GAO reviewed the use of COVID-19 relief funds by schools and BIE as part of GAO's responsibilities under the CARES Act. This report examines how BIE and schools spent their COVID funds and BIE's guidance to schools on fund use, and the extent to which BIE oversees schools' fund use. GAO surveyed a generalizable sample of 85 BIE schools, with 70 schools responding, to collect information on their use of COVID funds and the extent to which BIE provided them guidance on spending. GAO also analyzed agency data on BIE schools' purchase card activity; reviewed relevant federal statutes, regulations, and agency policies and procedures for overseeing school COVID spending; and interviewed BIE and school officials. Wed, 27 Mar 2024 10:53:40 -0400 /products/gao-24-105451 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107052 This is the Spanish language highlights associated with GAO-24-106162. Lo que encontró la GAO Las Instituciones de Servicio a Hispanos (HSI, por sus siglas en inglés), es decir, universidades con una matrícula de estudiantes universitarios de al menos el 25 por ciento de hispanos, tienen grandes necesidades de instalaciones, según la encuesta generalizable de la GAO sobre las HSI. Según la encuesta de la GAO, se estima que, en promedio, el 43 por ciento del espacio edificable de las HSI (es decir, los pies cuadrados) necesita reparaciones o reemplazo. Los atrasos en mantenimiento diferido, los daños ocasionados por desastres naturales o climáticos severos y los esfuerzos de modernización de las instalaciones impulsan las necesidades de instalaciones de las HSI. Por ejemplo, las HSI tienen un retraso en promedio en mantenimiento diferido de casi $100 millones, según la encuesta de la GAO. Además, se estima que el 77 por ciento de las HSI tienen al menos un proyecto de mantenimiento diferido que aborda una cuestión de salud o seguridad. Más aun, se estima que el 65 por ciento de las HSI han experimentado al menos un desastre natural o un evento climatológico severo en los últimos 5 años que ha dado como resultado la necesidad de reparar o reemplazar algunas instalaciones. Las HSI también informaron sobre necesidades de infraestructura digital insatisfechas relacionadas con el acceso y conectividad a Internet, la ciberseguridad, y los esfuerzos de aprendizaje híbrido, según la encuesta de la GAO. Por ejemplo, la GAO estima que, en aproximadamente un tercio de las HSI, más del 10 por ciento de los estudiantes no pueden conectarse de manera confiable a Internet fuera del campus, ya sea porque no pueden costear una conexión a Internet o porque ellos no tienen un dispositivo adecuado. La mayoría de las HSI (aproximadamente el 74 por ciento) también ha experimentado un ciberataque en los últimos 5 años. Las HSI realizaron inversiones recientes en aprendizaje híbrido como resultado de la pandemia de la COVID-19 y la financiación federal relacionada. Sin embargo, la GAO estima que el 90 por ciento de las HSI que ofrecen cursos híbridos enfrentan algún desafío para continuar impartiéndolos, según los resultados de la encuesta. Ejemplos de instalaciones e infraestructura digital en las HSI Las HSI dependieron de múltiples fuentes para financiar sus necesidades de proyectos de capital durante los últimos 5 años. Estas fuentes frecuentemente incluían subvenciones o consignaciones de capital estatal para las HSI públicas y matrículas y cuotas para las HSI privadas, según la encuesta de la GAO. La GAO estima que el 43 por ciento de las HSI estaban satisfechas con su acceso general a financiación. Sin embargo, las HSI informaron que enfrentaban desafíos comunes para conseguir financiación para proyectos de capital. Por ejemplo, según la encuesta de la GAO, se estima que el 74 por ciento de las HSI públicas consideran que la financiación estatal insuficiente es un desafío para abordar las necesidades de proyectos de capital. Además, alrededor de tres cuartas partes de las HSI privadas enfrentan desafíos debido a la diminución de los ingresos por matrículas y cuotas. El Departamento de Educación cuenta con tres programas de subvenciones para HSI eligibles. Aunque las HSI pueden utilizar estos fondos para apoyar proyectos de capital, en cambio, generalmente utilizan estos fondos de subvención para otras necesidades, como servicios estudiantiles, según los funcionarios del Departamento de Educación. Por qué llevó a cabo este estudio la GAO Las HSI desempeñan un papel destacado en el sistema de educación superior del país. Por ejemplo, 574 de las HSI inscribieron más de 2 millones de estudiantes hispanos en el año escolar de 2021 a 2022, lo que representa el 60 por ciento de todos los estudiantes hispanos que cursan estudios universitarios. Como la mayoría de las universidades, las HSI deben seguir invirtiendo en sus instalaciones e infraestructura digital para poder atender a sus estudiantes con seguridad y eficacia. Un informe de 2021 de la Cámara de Representantes incluye una disposición para que la GAO examine las necesidades de infraestructura, tanto física como digital, en las HSI. Este informe describe (1) las necesidades de instalaciones, (2) las necesidades de infraestructura digital y (3) las fuentes de financiación para los proyectos de capital de las HSI. Para realizar este trabajo, la GAO encuestó una muestra representativa de las HSI en los EE. UU. (incluido Puerto Rico) y recibió respuestas generalizables de 169 universidades. Las estimaciones de la encuesta tienen un margen de error no mayor que más o menos 8 puntos porcentuales con un nivel de confianza del 95 por ciento. La GAO también analizó los datos más recientes de las HSI sobre características institucionales y de los estudiantes universitarios (2021 a 2022), finanzas (2020 a 2021), programas de subvenciones para las HSI (2017 a 2022) y fondos de ayuda de COVID-19 (2021). La GAO también visitó 10 HSI que fueron seleccionadas para representar diferentes tamaños, sectores (público o privado sin fines de lucro) y regiones geográficas, y entrevistó a funcionarios del Departamento de Educación y organizaciones de las HSI. Además, la GAO revisó las leyes, los reglamentos, y los directrices federales relevantes. Para más información, contactar a Melissa Emrey-Arras al (617) 788-0534 o emreyarrasm@gao.gov. Tue, 12 Mar 2024 11:39:33 -0400 /products/gao-24-107052 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106162 Para la versión de esta página en español, ver a GAO-24-107052. What GAO Found Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSI)—colleges with an undergraduate student enrollment that is at least 25 percent Hispanic—have extensive facility needs, according to GAO's generalizable survey of HSIs. Based on GAO's survey, an estimated 43 percent of HSIs' building space (i.e., square footage) needs repairs or replacement, on average. Deferred maintenance backlogs, damage from natural disasters or severe weather, and facility modernization efforts drive HSIs' facility needs. For example, HSIs have an average deferred maintenance backlog of almost $100 million, based on GAO's survey. Further, an estimated 77 percent of HSIs have at least one deferred maintenance project that addresses a health or safety issue. In addition, an estimated 65 percent of HSIs have experienced at least one natural disaster or severe weather event in the past 5 years that has resulted in the need to repair or replace some facilities. HSIs also reported unmet digital infrastructure needs related to internet access and connectivity, cybersecurity, and hybrid learning efforts, according to GAO's survey. For example, GAO estimates that at roughly a third of HSIs, more than 10 percent of students cannot reliably connect to the internet off-campus either because they cannot afford an internet connection or they lack an appropriate device. Most HSIs (an estimated 74 percent) have also experienced a cyberattack within the previous 5 years. HSIs made recent investments in hybrid learning as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and related federal funding. However, GAO estimates 90 percent of HSIs that offer hybrid courses face some challenge continuing to deliver them, based on survey results. Examples of Facility and Digital Infrastructure at Hispanic-Serving Institutions HSIs relied on multiple sources to fund their capital project needs over the last 5 years. These sources frequently included state capital grants or appropriations for public HSIs and tuition and fees for private HSIs, according to GAO's survey. GAO estimates 43 percent of HSIs were satisfied with their overall access to funding. However, HSIs reported common challenges securing funding for capital projects. For example, an estimated 74 percent of public HSIs consider insufficient state funding to be a challenge towards addressing capital project needs, based on GAO's survey. Additionally, about three quarters of private HSIs face challenges due to declining tuition and fees revenue. The Department of Education has three grant programs for eligible HSIs. Although HSIs can use this funding to support capital projects, instead, they generally use these grant funds for other needs, such as student services, according to Education officials. Why GAO Did This Study HSIs play a prominent role in the nation's higher education system. For example, 574 HSIs enrolled over 2 million Hispanic students in the 2021–2022 school year, representing 60 percent of all Hispanic students in college. Like most colleges, HSIs must continue to invest in their facilities and digital infrastructure to serve their students safely and effectively. A 2021 House report includes a provision for GAO to examine the infrastructure needs—both physical and digital—at HSIs. This report describes HSIs' (1) facility needs, (2) digital infrastructure needs, and (3) funding sources for capital projects. To conduct this work, GAO surveyed a representative sample of HSIs in the U.S. (including Puerto Rico) and received generalizable responses from 169 colleges. Survey estimates have a margin of error no greater than plus or minus 8 percentage points at the 95 percent level of confidence. GAO also analyzed the most recent HSI data on college student and institutional characteristics (2021–2022), finances (2020–2021), HSI grant programs (2017–2022), and COVID relief funds (2021). GAO also visited 10 HSIs—selected to capture different sizes, sectors (public or private nonprofit), and geographic regions—and interviewed Education officials and HSI organizations. In addition, GAO reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and guidance. For more information, contact Melissa Emrey-Arras at (617) 788-0534 or emreyarrasm@gao.gov. Tue, 12 Mar 2024 09:46:10 -0400 /products/gao-24-106162 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106174 What GAO Found The Department of Education is designing and testing a new model to estimate future costs of the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan (Direct Loan) program, which provides financial assistance to students and their parents for postsecondary education. Education aims to begin using the model with the President's fiscal year 2028 budget. Education officials said the new model is being designed to better reflect the complexity of both borrower behavior and the Direct Loan program. Decisions about data, analytical design, technology, and staffing will influence the model's long-term operation and the quality of future cost estimates. Education is required to develop cost estimates for the President's budget in accordance with the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (FCRA). FCRA reflects Education's borrowing from the Department of the Treasury to finance lending. GAO compared FCRA with three federal and private sector alternative approaches that could be used to develop cost estimates. These approaches were the Congressional Budget Office fair value (federal), Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Current Expected Credit Losses (private sector), and FASB fair value (private sector). These four approaches do not affect the eventual budgetary costs over time but do result in different initial cost estimates. Estimated initial costs under the non-FCRA approaches will generally be higher than what is initially estimated under FCRA due to a variety of factors, such as the addition of market risk and other risks. Regardless of the approach used, how well an agency is able to predict future cash flows is fundamental to calculating reliable cost estimates. Illustration of Overall Budgetary Cost Estimates for a Group of Direct Loans Converging over Time as Costs are Updated Note: The graphic assumes that actual cash flows will equal estimated cash flows over time. Education publishes information about the Direct Loan program's performance and risks that is generally consistent with guidance, but there are areas where the department could enhance its reporting by expanding the sensitivity analysis to cover a wider range of economic circumstances. Such information is particularly important given the size and complexity of the Direct Loan program. Why GAO Did This Study Over the last 3 decades, the Direct Loan program has grown in size and complexity, with over $1.3 trillion in outstanding loans as of September 2023. This program provides financial assistance to help students and their parents pay for postsecondary education. GAO was asked to review issues related to Education's Direct Loan program cost estimates. This report examines (1) the status of Education's planned model for estimating Direct Loan costs; (2) how certain federal and private sector estimation approaches would affect Direct Loan budgetary costs over time; and (3) the extent to which Education provides key information about the performance and risks of the Direct Loan program. GAO reviewed documentation on Education's current student loan model and plans for its new model. GAO analyzed the potential budgetary impact over time of four approaches for estimating the cost of a selected group of loans. GAO identified relevant reports, reviewed reporting guidance for federal loan programs, and interviewed officials from Education, other agency officials, and stakeholders with relevant expertise. Mon, 04 Mar 2024 09:20:42 -0500 /products/gao-24-106174 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106421 What GAO Found Starting in fiscal year 2020, DOD developed and phased in procedures to vet international military students attending training at Department of Defense (DOD) installations and facilities in the U.S. With few exceptions, DOD vets these students prior to travel to the U.S. for training and periodically during the students' stay. According to training management system data, from October 1, 2019, through March 31, 2023, DOD vetted over 29,000 cases, including students and any accompanying family members. DOD identified findings in 103 cases: four were classified as “high” risk, 18 were “moderate”, and 81 were “low.” DOD denied access to nine students for various security-related reasons. International Military Student Cases by Risk Level and Adjudication Result for October 1, 2019, through March 31, 2023 Risk level Cases Approved for training Denied Pending Adjudication not performeda High risk 4 0 4 0 0 Moderate risk 18 7 3 4 4 Low risk 81 47 2 14 18 No findings 29,202 29,202 0 0 0 Total 29,305 29,256 9 18 22 Source: GAO analysis of data from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency. | GAO-24-106421 Note: Vetting of international military students began with basic screening in December 2019 and DOD continued to phase in initial security vetting through March 2022. aDepartment of Defense (DOD) officials stated they did not adjudicate 22 of the moderate and low risk cases for reasons such as training cancellation or the student completed training during the establishment of vetting procedures and has since departed the U.S. DOD has taken some steps to improve implementation of vetting procedures for international military students. However, DOD has not assessed implementation to identify opportunities for improvement. For example, stakeholders told GAO of factors in vetting implementation that could be improved, such as limitations with in-country data collection and a time-consuming process for sharing information between stakeholders. DOD circulated a draft progress report on program metrics, such as the number of students who underwent vetting for fiscal year 2022. However, DOD has not finalized the report, and it is unclear if it will include an assessment of any opportunities for improvement in the vetting procedures. Without an assessment, DOD will not have a full understanding of factors that hinder vetting implementation. DOD also cannot determine whether or how it should take action to improve vetting implementation. The Department of State and DOD share information to support international military student vetting in a variety of ways, such as sharing database access and confirming vetting. However, State and DOD have not ensured that roles and responsibilities are fully clarified in guidance or written agreements. If DOD and State take actions to clarify roles and responsibilities for sharing information on issues related to international military students, the agencies can better coordinate on program management, including communicating relevant policy updates and sharing additional data and analysis regarding vetting. Why GAO Did This Study DOD provides education and training to foreign military personnel at DOD sites. On December 6, 2019, an international military student killed three U.S. service members and injured eight others while attending training at Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida. The attack raised questions about personnel safety at DOD sites hosting students for training. The William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 includes a provision for GAO to review DOD's implementation of security vetting for international military students and accompanying family members. GAO's report assesses the extent to which (1) DOD has developed vetting procedures for international military students and addressed any implementation challenges; and (2) State and DOD have shared information related to students' training at DOD sites in the U.S. GAO reviewed documentation; analyzed vetting result data for October 1, 2019, through March 31, 2023; and interviewed DOD and State officials and stakeholders from six unified combatant commands and three U.S. embassies. Thu, 29 Feb 2024 09:08:39 -0500 /products/gao-24-106421 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106077 What GAO Found Administered by the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS) Office of Head Start (OHS), Head Start aims to promote school readiness for young children in poverty. However, Head Start availability varies widely across states and counties and does not closely align with child poverty. GAO found that the number of Head Start seats for every 100 young children in poverty ranged from nine in Nevada to 53 in Oregon in 2022. This high degree of variability persisted even when accounting for state and county child poverty rates. Further, the Head Start statutory formula, by which annual funding is provided to grant recipients, is not responsive to changes in child poverty. As a result, grant recipients in states with rising child poverty can generally serve a lower proportion of income-eligible children. Head Start Seats Available for Every 100 Young Children in Poverty, Fall 2022 Current statutory provisions do not support the alignment of Head Start resources with need. These provisions include the annual funding formula and those governing the distribution of expansion funding, which Congress periodically provides to expand Head Start's reach. GAO found that provisions intended to target additional expansion funding to states with relatively low access to Head Start services, if applied today, would result in nearly all states qualifying to receive this funding. Federal grants may be designed in a variety of ways, depending on the purpose Congress wishes to achieve. Congress has an opportunity to review these provisions to ensure Head Start resources are directed toward its highest priorities. Within the existing statutory provisions, OHS has authority to consider the distribution of Head Start services when competitive grant funding is available to award. However, OHS rarely uses this authority. Doing so—and leveraging agency data to inform its grantmaking decisions—would help OHS better achieve its goal of targeting services to places most in need. Why GAO Did This Study In 2021–2022, Head Start served nearly 790,000 young children, primarily from low-income families. However, HHS estimates that far more children are eligible than can be served due to limited resources, heightening the importance of targeting services effectively. House Report 117-96 includes a provision for GAO to review the nationwide distribution of Head Start resources and what could help better align funding with need. This report examines the extent to which (1) Head Start resources align geographically with child poverty; (2) statutory provisions support aligning resources with need; and (3) OHS uses its grantmaking authority to align resources with need. GAO analyzed Head Start enrollment data from 2022 and Head Start funding and Census child poverty data from 2006 and 2021 (most recent available comparable data), interviewed OHS officials and stakeholder organizations, such as the National Head Start Association; and reviewed relevant federal laws and agency documents. Tue, 27 Feb 2024 10:24:53 -0500 /products/gao-24-106077 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-106182 What GAO Found The Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA), which educates over 66,000 military-connected pre-K through grade 12 students worldwide, collects detailed information about reported incidents of unwanted sexual behavior among students. These behaviors include those that are normative (but inappropriate), like unwanted touching in younger grades. It also includes behaviors that are severe and problematic at any age, like sexual assault. Since 2019, unwanted sexual behavior reports at DODEA schools have increased substantially due to enhanced reporting requirements. However, DODEA has not sought feedback on its updated reporting requirements from school leaders, who raised concerns about significant administrative burden with formally reporting normative behaviors, and stigma for students involved in them. DODEA School Incident Reports and Key Efforts to Enhance Reporting Note: DODEA school closures during the pandemic may also have contributed to fewer reports of unwanted sexual behaviors during school years 2019–2020 and 2020–2021. DODEA students who are harmed by or exhibit problematic sexual behaviors face challenges accessing appropriate support services. DOD policy directs the Military Community Advocacy Directorate's Family Advocacy Program (FAP) to implement a consistent response strategy. However, GAO identified various weaknesses hindering these efforts. Specifically, the Military Community Advocacy Directorate: has not monitored how consistently FAP includes DODEA in multidisciplinary teams, which are installation-wide response efforts, despite known issues; has not monitored its efforts to close the gap in the number of FAP clinicians with expertise needed to treat children with problematic behaviors; has not assessed the effectiveness of its efforts to address low participation in FAP clinical support services among eligible military families; and chose to exclude the nearly one in five DODEA students who are children of civilian defense workers from accessing most FAP services and has not assessed whether this policy meets the needs of military communities. Without addressing these weaknesses, DOD risks ongoing challenges in ensuring that students who are harmed by or exhibit problematic sexual behavior receive the support needed to assure the safety of the DODEA community. Why GAO Did This Study DODEA is required to protect students from discrimination based on sex, which can include sexual harassment. Senate Report 117-130 and House Report 117-397 include a provision for GAO to examine DODEA's response to unwanted sexual behaviors. This report examines (1) the information DODEA collects to identify unwanted sexual behavior and (2) the availability of support services to students that are harmed by or exhibit such behavior. GAO analyzed the most recent available DODEA data on reported incidents of unwanted sexual behavior among students in school years 2019–2020 through 2022–2023. GAO also conducted site visits to 11 DODEA schools and the FAP agencies serving five military communities in the U.S. and Europe, selected for geographic, grade level, and service branch variation. GAO also reviewed relevant federal laws and agency policies and interviewed agency officials from DODEA, Child and Youth Advocacy, and FAP. Tue, 13 Feb 2024 09:12:45 -0500 /products/gao-24-106182 Letter Report https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-105648 What GAO Found Roughly 2.5 million students attend a K-12 public school that their state has identified for comprehensive support and improvement (CSI) under Title I, Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA). GAO found that CSI schools are among the lowest-performing schools in the nation. GAO also found that compared to other public schools, CSI schools are much more likely to serve predominantly Black and low-income students and those who are not proficient in reading or math. CSI schools also have higher student-teacher ratios than other schools. In its review of a nationally generalizable sample of CSI school improvement plans, GAO estimated that less than half (42 percent) appeared to address all three required elements it reviewed, which include that the plan: (1) be based on a needs assessment, (2) identify resource inequities, and (3) include evidence-based interventions. Further, GAO identified wide variation among the CSI plans it reviewed. For instance, when identifying resource inequities, some plans focused on the types of inequities students faced in their own lives (e.g., poverty or homelessness). Other plans focused on how equitably educational resources (e.g., funding or teachers) were distributed across the district or within the school. Estimated Percent of Comprehensive Support and Improvement Plans Available as of June 2022 that Appeared to Address Three Selected Required Elements Note: GAO did not independently assess legal compliance with its three selected Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 requirements. Education monitors state compliance with ESEA school improvement requirements (e.g., to approve CSI plans and monitor their implementation) and has identified and addressed compliance issues through its efforts. For example, Education found that five of the nine states it monitored from February 2020 through July 2023 failed to enforce ESEA requirements that CSI plans include all of the three elements GAO assessed. Education required the states to take corrective action to address these issues. However, Education's ability to identify these and other compliance issues may be limited by a weakness GAO identified in Education's monitoring approach. Specifically, Education does not select the CSI plans it reviews. Instead, it relies on monitored states and districts to do so. Ensuring that Education staff independently select these documents could help Education better assure that it is identifying and responding to compliance risks through this key part of its monitoring strategy. Why GAO Did This Study ESEA Title I, Part A purposes include providing all children the opportunity to receive a fair, equitable, and high-quality education. To help achieve that goal, states must identify schools in need of support and improvement. States oversee improvement efforts; Education monitors states' oversight. Senate Report 115-289 includes a provision for GAO to review school improvement activities. This report examines (1) CSI school characteristics; (2) how CSI plans address selected ESEA requirements; and (3) Education monitoring. GAO compared the characteristics of CSI and other schools using 2019-20 Education data (the most recent available). GAO also analyzed a generalizable sample of CSI plans (the most recent available as of June 2022) to assess how they addressed three ESEA-required elements for plan content for which Education has issued guidance. GAO interviewed officials from three CSI schools selected for varied locale and other factors and held two discussion groups with officials from six districts with CSI schools across six states. GAO also interviewed Education officials and reviewed relevant federal laws and monitoring documents. Tue, 30 Jan 2024 09:29:03 -0500 /products/gao-24-105648 Letter Report