High-Risk Series

Student Financial Aid Gao ID: HR-97-11 February 1, 1997

In 1990, GAO began a special effort to identify federal programs at high risk for waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. GAO issued a series of reports in December 1992 on the fundamental causes of the problems in the high-risk areas; it followed up on the status of these areas in February 1995. This, GAO's third series of high-risk reports, revisits these troubled government programs and designates five additional areas as high-risk (defense infrastructure, information security, the year 2000 problem, supplemental security income, and the 2000 decennial census), bringing to 25 the number of high-risk programs on GAO's list. The high-risk series includes an overview, a quick reference guide, and 12 individual reports. The high-risk series may be ordered as a full set, a two-volume package including the overview and the quick reference guide, or as 12 separate reports describing in detail these vulnerable government programs. GAO summarized the high-risk series in testimony before Congress (GAO/T-HR-97-22).

GAO found that: (1) in fiscal year 1995, the federal government paid over $2.5 billion to make good its guarantee on defaulted student loans; (2) in addition, inadequate Department oversight has contributed to abuses on the part of some schools participating in federal student aid programs; (3) Congress addressed many of these problems through amendments in 1992 and 1993 to title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965; (4) the Department has acted to address these problems and their causes; however, these actions have not completely resolved the underlying problems; (5) partly to help strengthen the Department's internal controls, the 1992 and 1993 amendments: (a) required that financial and compliance audits of guaranty agencies be conducted annually rather than every 2 years; and (b) required that lenders and guaranty agencies share more of the risk of defaults in FFELP by reducing the maximum insurance and reimbursement rates on a defaulted loan from 100 to 98 percent; (6) the Department has generally tried to address problems in its student aid programs, and some of these efforts appear to be achieving some results; (7) in July 1996, the Department had completed actions or had actions in progress or planned to address 186 of 205 recommendations, most made over a 4-year period by the Department's Office of Inspector General and GAO, to improve its management of federal student financial aid; (8) although the Department has shown a commitment to improving its oversight and management of the student aid programs, the financial risk to U.S. taxpayers remains substantial; (9) the procedural and structural program elements that are the root causes of the problems remain; (10) some of these problems arose from the statutory design of the programs and will persist unless changed through congressional action; (11) although the Department can mitigate some of these problems through more effective oversight and management, many of the Department's initiatives have not been fully implemented; (12) progress toward their full implementation has been mixed; (13) the student aid programs employ complex and cumbersome processes with many participants; (14) each major program has its own procedures and set of participants; (15) management shortcomings are a major problem, although in some areas, the Department has improved some its practices; and (16) the Department has begun planning a major reengineering effort that it expects will resolve these problems in the next several years.



The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.