Report raps Education for 'gross mismanagement' of grants program

The Education Department's failure to properly account for billions of dollars in federal grant money constitutes gross mismanagement at the agency, according to a new report from the Office of Special Counsel. The report, the result of an investigation of allegations by a whistleblower, determined that Education's grant management system--known as the Grants Administration and Payment System (GAPS)--lacks adequate security controls and does not properly track accounting information. The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) investigates whistleblower allegations of waste, fraud and abuse. The OSC requires agencies to investigate such allegations and report back on their findings and any actions they have taken to fix the problem. The OSC then reviews the agency's report and transmits the report to the President and Congress for further action. Although Education acknowledged weaknesses in its financial system, it said the allegations did not constitute "gross mismanagement" because the agency has addressed and tried to remedy accounting problems. John Gard, a systems accountant at Education, originally blew the whistle on the agency, claiming that Education made improper payments to federal grant recipients, wasting and mismanaging billions of taxpayers' dollars as a result of deficiencies in GAPS. Gard said the agency moved ahead with GAPS' implementation in 1998, despite his warnings about the flaws in the system. In the report, Special Counsel Elaine Kaplan substantiated Gard's allegation of gross mismanagement at the agency, disputing the Education Department's definition of the term. "The agency is incorrect that a finding of 'gross mismanagement' requires a conclusion that it acted in deliberate disregard of known deficiencies," said Kaplan. Instead, Kaplan concluded that any management action or inaction that put the agency's ability to fulfill its mission at high risk constituted gross mismanagement. Education's report on the investigation said many of Gard's allegations concerning its accounting system had previously been investigated and documented by the department's inspector general and the General Accounting Office. According to Education, it has implemented all of the IG's recommendations for correcting accounting problems with GAPS as of September 2000. In its report, Education said it "has and will continue to commit appropriate resources to correct conditions that challenge internal controls." Education defended the GAPS system, saying there was no evidence that the agency wasted funds implementing it, and that the system will benefit the agency's financial management capabilities. The agency plans to review grantee accounts from May 1998 to the present and identify discrepancies between the old grant management system, GAPS, and the agency's overall financial management system. Education pledged to work with the Treasury Department to correct any errors. Kaplan pointed to the agency's problems in producing reliable financial statements under the 1990 Chief Financial Officers Act as further evidence of weaknesses in its financial management. In fiscal 1998, Education's financial statements were too unreliable to be audited, and in fiscal 1999, the agency failed to receive a clean opinion. "Notwithstanding these pre-existing weaknesses, the agency's decision to update its financial management systems without first ensuring the stability of its current system security or providing for proper retention of data appears to fall within the legal definition of gross mismanagement," said Kaplan.
Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Federal IT Applications: Assessing Government's Core Drivers

    In order to better understand the current state of external and internal-facing agency workplace applications, Government Business Council (GBC) and Riverbed undertook an in-depth research study of federal employees. Overall, survey findings indicate that federal IT applications still face a gamut of challenges with regard to quality, reliability, and performance management.

  • PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

    This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

  • Toward A More Innovative Government

    This research study aims to understand how state and local leaders regard their agency’s innovation efforts and what they are doing to overcome the challenges they face in successfully implementing these efforts.

  • From Volume to Value: UK’s NHS Digital Provides U.S. Healthcare Agencies A Roadmap For Value-Based Payment Models

    The U.S. healthcare industry is rapidly moving away from traditional fee-for-service models and towards value-based purchasing that reimburses physicians for quality of care in place of frequency of care.

  • GBC Flash Poll: Is Your Agency Safe?

    Federal leaders weigh in on the state of information security


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.