From the U.S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov

Transcript for: Watchdog Report: Head Start's Use of Recovery Act
Funding

Audio interview by GAO staff with Cornelia Ashby, Director, Education,
Workforce, and Income Security

Related GAO Work: GAO-11-166: Recovery Act Update on Head Start

Released on: December 15, 2010


[ Background Music ]

[ Narrator: ] Welcome to GAO's Watchdog Report, your source for news and
information from the Government Accountability Office. It's December 15,
2010. The childhood development program Head Start received $2.1 billion
through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This funding was
provided primarily to expand services to additional children and
families. A group led by Cornelia Ashby, a director in GAO's Education,
Workforce, and Income Security team, recently reviewed the use and
accountability of those funds as part of GAO's Recovery Act reporting.
GAO's Jeremy Cluchey sat down with Cornelia to learn more.

[ Jeremy Cluchey: ] GAO's latest report on the Recovery Act focuses on
Head Start. Can you provide a little bit of background about this
program?

[ Cornelia Ashby: ] Well, Head Start is operated or administered by the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, its Administration for
Children and Families, and within that, the Office of Head Start. There
are really two programs. The Head Start Program, the original, was
established in 1965, and it was to help low-income students, ages 4 and
5, to prepare for school. In 1994, the Early Head Start Program was
established, and that really covers from prenatal through age 3. And
that program also is aimed at pregnant women.

 [ Jeremy Cluchey: ] One major goal of the Recovery Act funding that
Head Start received was to expand enrollment and services in the
program. To what extent has your team found that this is being achieved?

[ Cornelia Ashby: ] It is being achieved. As we report, there is some
confusion about the definition of enrollment, and different grantees use
different definitions. But, yes, we do believe that enrollment did
increase. And as of the end of the September 2010, the additional
children and families served was about 55,000. Services increased in
terms of staffing available, transportation, supplies, equipment. In
some cases, facilities were built or renovated. So services to children
and the number of enrollments did increase.

[ Jeremy Cluchey: ] You mentioned differences among grantees, and
another finding of your team's report had to do with how different
grantees handled the issue of unobligated funds. Can you elaborate on
this?

[ Cornelia Ashby: ] Certainly. The Recovery Act funds were for 2 years.
And the Office of Head Start distributed the funds for year 1 and year
2. For some, they understood that they would be able to seek approval to
carry over funds to the next year, and that was their plan. But others,
they weren't so sure. The guidance coming from the regional offices were
different, and no one really seemed to want to commit to putting
something in writing as to what the policy was. So, some grantees,
feeling that they would lose the money at the end of fiscal year 2010,
decided to spend the money on things that were not necessarily top
priority. Now, we didn't find any expenditures that were improper in
terms of what the money could be used for, but had they been able to
follow their initial plans, they probably would have spent the money on
other things.

[ Jeremy Cluchey: ] Earlier this year, GAO released a report on the
fraudulent enrollment practices among some Head Start grantees. Did your
team identify any ways in which oversight of the program has changed as
a result?

[ Cornelia Ashby: ] The major thing that has happened is that Head Start
has decided, in terms of when it does its monitoring, that it will now
do unannounced visits. Previously, Head Start gave grantees a 30-day
notice as to when they were going to come to do their triennial reviews.
Now, those will be, quote, surprise visits.

[ Jeremy Cluchey: ] What is GAO recommending the Office of Head Start do
to address the issues identified in your report?

[ Cornelia Ashby: ] We identified three issues, basically. One had to do
with the definition of enrollment, and we would like for Head Start to
clarify that definition. The issue is whether to count enrollments at
the point where a child is approved for the program, or to only count
enrollments where the child is in attendance and receiving services.
There's also an issue of the carry over. And as I explained earlier,
some grantees seem to understand, rightfully, that they could seek
approval, and would likely get it, to carry over the funds. And others
were just confused, or some just thought they would lose the money.
Well, we think that the Office of Head Start could improve its
communication of just what its policy is with regard to the Recovery Act
funds. And then finally, our recommendation was that the regional office
officials perform and document the risk management meetings, and then
the outcomes can be incorporated in future reviews, in terms of the
scope of the reviews and the staffing for the reviews.

[ Background Music ]

[ Narrator: ] To learn more, visit GAO's Web site at gao.gov and be sure
to tune in to the next edition of GAO's Watchdog Report for more from
the congressional watchdog, the Government Accountability Office.