Pell Grant Validation Imposes Some Costs and Does Not Greatly Reduce Award Errors: New Strategies Are Needed
PEMD-85-10
Published: Sep 27, 1985. Publicly Released: Sep 27, 1985.
Skip to Highlights
Highlights
GAO analyzed the Department of Education's efforts to verify data submitted by applicants to the Pell Grant Program through validation and the effects of validation on educational institutions and on student applicants for financial aid.
Recommendations
Matter for Congressional Consideration
| Matter | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|
| Congress may wish to consider the rates of Pell Grant error to determine whether additional guidance to Education would be helpful. |
Closed – Not Implemented
|
Congress examined student aid programs thoroughly before reauthorizing them in 1986. |
| Congress may wish to consider whether the evaluative information that is now available is sufficient for achieving accountability and accuracy in the administration of the Pell Grant Program. |
Closed – Not Implemented
|
Neither the House nor Senate addressed the issue of data on Pell Grant or other student aid program error rates in reporting their revised Higher Education Act bills in 1986. Since a reauthorization is not immanent, the matter for consideration should be closed. |
Recommendations for Executive Action
| Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Department of Education | Education may wish to present proposals for legislative change. However, before taking specific actions, Education needs goals for accuracy, diverse strategies clearly linked to the goals, better data, and internal management structures that will apply leadership to corrective action. A comprehensive effort might include a more active search for relevant experience in other agencies and a greater use of pilot tests of promising practices without having to experiment on the regular system. In addition, a comprehensive effort to define goals and strategies might be made in cooperation with the postsecondary institutions that now carry the responsibility for day-to-day administration of the Pell Grant Program. |
Closed – Not Implemented
New error data in 1987 brought some new attention to the problem, since error rates were still high. The Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education wrote GAO in November 1987 about various plans for addressing the error rates in all student aid programs, including search of other agencies' experience and pilot testing some ideas. Education continues to face congressional opposition.
|
| Office of Management and Budget | The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) should maintain its oversight of the Pell Grant Program. OMB could also promote the sharing of promising internal practices in federal agencies, identify workable and effective approaches for institutions carrying out verification functions for federal programs, and encourage the use of joint or substitutable eligibility in order to reduce the work required for need analyses and eligibility reviews, wherever possible. |
Closed – Implemented
OMB oversight of Pell Grant quality control issues by the budget examiner for higher education has been visible and vigorous.
|
| Office of Management and Budget | OMB should maintain its oversight of the program, in future management reviews, to ensure that OMB concerns and the issues raised, including the need for improvements in Pell Grant evaluation information, are considered and acted upon. |
Closed – Implemented
OMB has continued its emphasis on error prevention and correction in all dealings with the Department on Student Aid Management.
|
Full Report
Office of Public Affairs
Topics
Aid for educationEducational grantsFederal grantsGrant administrationGrant award proceduresGrant monitoringIneligible granteesStudent financial aidStudentsGrant award