The Government Accountability Office warned that billions of dollars in federal education aid face increased risks of waste and fraud after the U.S. Department of Education suspended its primary oversight mechanism for state compliance.
A new GAO report found that the suspension of consolidated monitoring under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) leaves half of the states unmonitored for reporting requirements that apply to all jurisdictions. The department halted the comprehensive review process this year while developing a new approach, but as of August, officials had not provided a timeline for resuming reviews or details on alternative compliance methods.
“As a result of suspending consolidated monitoring, Education will not be able to systematically assess whether states are complying with ESEA requirements and following their approved state plans,” the report said.
Funding at Stake
The oversight gap affects a significant portion of federal education spending. Title I funding, which supports schools with high numbers of low-income students, constitutes about two-thirds of nearly $27 billion in total ESEA funding in 2025. States receiving these funds are required to develop statewide accountability systems and report data on chronic absenteeism.
The consolidated monitoring framework was fully implemented in 2019. The GAO noted that without systematic assessment, the federal government cannot verify if states are adhering to their approved plans or meeting statutory obligations.
Data Reliability Concerns
Beyond financial oversight, the report highlighted serious issues with the reliability of federal absenteeism data. Chronic absenteeism has remained elevated following the COVID-19 pandemic, with estimates suggesting one-quarter of K-12 students were chronically absent in recent years. The Education Department defines chronic absenteeism as missing 10% or more of school days.
However, the method used to calculate these rates has produced implausible results in many districts. States report chronically absent students over a full school year but base total enrollment figures on a single date. This mismatch in timeframes created statistical anomalies, including absenteeism rates reported above 100% in some schools.
“Calculating rates using mismatched timeframes has resulted in unreliable and implausible chronic absenteeism rates (e.g., rates over 100 percent),” the GAO said.
The data discrepancies were particularly pronounced in specific school categories. Nearly 13% of Comprehensive Support and Improvement schools reported implausible rates exceeding 100%, compared to about 2% of schools not in that category. Shared-time schools, which often serve students across multiple districts or programs, showed even higher error rates.
Thirty percent of shared-time schools nationwide had “implausible” chronic absenteeism rates. In Pennsylvania, the issue was extreme, with 98% of shared-time schools reporting implausible figures. Conversely, several states reported no shared-time schools with implausible rates, including Idaho, Delaware, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, and Rhode Island.
The GAO findings suggest that without restored monitoring and corrected data collection methods, policymakers may lack accurate information to address persistent attendance challenges in American schools.