Recommendation: The Chief Operating Officer of the Office of Federal Student Aid should integrate the TEPSLF request into the PSLF application, for example, by including a checkbox on the PSLF application, to provide borrowers a more seamless way to request TEPSLF consideration. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open

Comments: Education agreed with this recommendation. To make the TEPSLF loan forgiveness process easier for borrowers, Education stated that it will integrate the TEPSLF request into the PSLF application as part of the improvements planned for the PSLF application under its new online interface for student borrowers. On April 15, 2020, Education published a notice in the Federal Register, seeking comments on its plans to consolidate the forms that borrowers must complete if they want to request either PSLF or TEPSLF loan forgiveness, so that borrowers would only need to submit a single form to obtain public service loan forgiveness. In June 2020, Education reported that its consolidated form to request PSLF or TESPLF loan forgiveness is in the final stages of the Office of Management and Budget clearance process, and they expect it to be finalized by October 2021. This consolidated form should provide borrowers a more seamless way to request public service loan forgiveness for whichever program they are eligible for. We will update the status of this recommendation once this consolidated loan forgiveness form is in place and borrowers are able to use it.

Recommendation: The Chief Operating Officer of the Office of Federal Student Aid should provide certain borrowers, for example, those who are denied TEPSLF for not having 120 qualifying payments, with more information about options available to contest TEPSLF decisions on the TEPSLF website and in their denial letters. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open

Comments: Education agreed with this recommendation. In March 2020, Education reported that it will add language to the TEPSLF website to provide borrowers with information on available options for contesting TEPSLF decisions. With respect to including this information in denial letters, Education noted that it is creating a new student loan infrastructure (Next Gen) and that it is not worth the time and resources to update the denial letters in the old system. However, Education reported that it will incorporate this information in denial letters created in the new Next Gen infrastructure, which is expected to be in place in October 2021. We will consider closing this recommendation when Education provides documentation that it has included information about options available to contest TEPSLF decisions on the TEPSLF website and in denial letters, as recommended.

Recommendation: The Chief Operating Officer of the Office of Federal Student Aid should include TEPSLF information in its PSLF Online Help Tool. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open

Comments: Education agreed with this recommendation and stated that it will include TEPSLF information in the PSLF Help Tool. In March 2020, Education noted that it is creating a new student loan infrastructure (Next Gen) and that it is not worth the time and resources to update the PLSF Online Help tool with TEPSLF information under the old system. However, Education reported that it will respond to this recommendation when the new Next Gen infrastructure is in place, which is expected to be in place in October 2021. We will consider closing this recommendation when Education provides documentation that it has included TEPSLF information in its PSLF Online Help Tool.

Recommendation: The Chief Operating Officer of Federal Student Aid should obtain data in order to verify income information for borrowers reporting zero income on IDR applications. For example, Education could pursue access to federal data sources or obtain access to an appropriate private data source. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open

Comments: Education generally agreed with this recommendation. Education stated that the President's fiscal year 2020 budget request includes a proposal that Congress pass legislation allowing the IRS to disclose tax return information directly to the department for the purpose of administering certain federal student financial aid programs. According to the agency, such legislation, if enacted, would allow borrowers to more easily certify their income on an annual basis to maintain enrollment in IDR plans, and allow the department to use the information to mitigate improper payments to borrowers as a result of misreported income data. Section 3 of the Fostering Undergraduate Talent by Unlocking Resources for Education Act (FUTURE Act), enacted in December 2019, provided Education with statutory authority to access certain Internal Revenue Service data for the purpose of determining eligibility for IDR plans, among other things (Public Law 116-91). As of August 2020, Education had begun planning for the implementation of the legislation. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that use of this authority to verify eligibility for IDR plans could result in over $2 billion in savings for 2020-2029.

Recommendation: The Chief Operating Officer of Federal Student Aid should implement data analytic practices, such as data matching, and follow-up procedures to review and verify that borrowers reporting zero income on IDR applications do not have sources of taxable income at the time of their application. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open

Comments: Education agreed with this recommendation, and from January to March 2020 initiated a pilot program with three of its loan servicers to conduct additional verification of income or family size information on IDR plan applications for a random sample of borrowers each month. When initiated, the pilot focused on IDR borrowers who self-certified that they had no income or who reported certain family sizes. According to Education, selected borrowers would be asked to provide documentation to their servicers to support the income or family size reported on their IDR application. In the event errors were identified, servicers would work with the borrowers to update their applications. If these reviews resulted in changes to a borrower's monthly payment amount, the borrower would be expected to begin paying the new amount within the next 60 days. According to Education, as of the end of March 2020 when the pilot was put on hold, participating servicers selected 48,855 borrowers for verification. The verification pilot was put on hold as it implemented student loan relief for borrowers under the CARES Act in response to the COVID-19 global pandemic (Public Law 116-136). Specifically, on March 27, 2020, the CARES Act was enacted, which suspended student loan payments due, interest accrual, and involuntary collections for Direct and Federal Family Education Loans held by Education through September 30, 2020. According to Education, the Department suspended all IDR recertifications during this period. On August 8, 2020, the President issued a presidential memorandum directing the Secretary of Education to extend this relief to borrowers through December 31, 2020. Education reported that it will weigh options for resuming the pilot against other critical priorities and available resources, noting that its long-term strategy is to fully implement the authorities granted under the FUTURE Act, which provides Education with statutory authority to access certain Internal Revenue Service data for the purpose of determining eligibility for IDR plans, among other things (Public Law 116-91). GAO will continue to monitor Education's actions in this area, and will close the recommendation when Education provides documentation that it has implemented data analytic practices and follow-up procedures to review and verify that borrowers reporting zero income on IDR applications do not have sources of taxable income at the time of their application.

Recommendation: The Chief Operating Officer of Federal Student Aid should implement data analytic practices, such as data mining, and follow-up procedures to review and verify family size entries in IDR borrower applications. For example, Education could review and verify all borrower reports of family size or a subset identified as being most susceptible to fraud or error. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open

Comments: Education agreed with this recommendation, and from January to March 2020 established a pilot program with three of its loan servicers to conduct additional verification of income or family size information on IDR plan applications for a random sample of borrowers each month. When initiated, the pilot focused on IDR borrowers who self-certified that they had no income or who reported certain family sizes. According to Education, selected borrowers would be asked to provide documentation to their servicers to support the income or family size reported on their IDR application. Education noted that under the pilot, loan servicers were required to request additional information from borrowers to verify family sizes greater than five; specifically, a statement listing each family member residing with the borrower and for whom the borrower pays at least 51 percent of the support. In the event errors were identified, servicers would work with the borrowers to update their applications. If these reviews resulted in changes to a borrower's monthly payment amount, the borrower would be expected to begin paying the new amount within the next 60 days. According to Education, as of the end of March 2020 when the pilot was put on hold, participating servicers selected 48,855 borrowers for verification. The verification pilot was put on hold as Education implemented student loan relief for borrowers under the CARES Act in response to the COVID-19 global pandemic (Public Law 116-136). Specifically, on March 27, 2020, the CARES Act was enacted, which suspended student loan payments due, interest accrual, and involuntary collections for Direct and Federal Family Education Loans held by Education through September 30, 2020. According to Education, the Department suspended all IDR recertifications during this period. On August 8, 2020, the President issued a presidential memorandum directing the Secretary of Education to extend this relief to borrowers through December 31, 2020. Education reported that it will weigh options for resuming the pilot against other critical priorities and available resources, noting that its long-term strategy is to fully implement the authorities granted under the FUTURE Act, which provides Education with statutory authority to access certain Internal Revenue Service data for the purpose of determining eligibility for IDR plans, among other things (Public Law 116-91). GAO will continue to monitor Education's actions in this area, and will close the recommendation when Education provides documentation that it has implemented data analytic practices and follow-up procedures to review and verify family size entries in IDR borrower applications.

Recommendation: The Director of CFPB should provide written clarification to nonbank private student loan lenders on their authorities under the Fair Credit Reporting Act to offer private student loan rehabilitation programs that include removing information from credit reports. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, CFBP does not plan to act on this recommendation because the law does not require nonbank private student loan lenders to seek CFPB's approval of student loan rehabilitation programs. CFPB stated that if a financial institution chooses to offer a private student loan rehabilitation program it would be protected under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. We maintain that clarification from CFPB that nonbank lenders have the authority to offer these programs could--depending on CFPB's interpretation--result in additional lenders offering rehabilitation programs that would allow more borrowers the opportunity to participate, or it could help ensure that only those entities CFPB has interpreted as being eligible to offer programs are doing so.

Recommendation: The Director of CFPB, after consulting with the prudential regulators and relevant industry groups, should provide written clarification on what information in a consumer's credit report constitutes a private student loan reported "default" that may be removed after successful completion of a private student loan rehabilitation program. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Status: Open

Comments: As of November 2019, CFPB stated that action on this recommendation is premature pending ongoing work by an industry association on what information may be removed from a credit report after successful completion of a private student loan rehabilitation program. We will continue to follow up with CFPB on its monitoring of this effort and consultation with relevant regulators.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should enroll loan servicers in FSA's continuous monitoring program and, in the interim, require these entities to report the results of security controls testing at an FSA-defined frequency. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: FSA concurred with this recommendation and the agency stated that loan servicers are scheduled to be enrolled in its ongoing security authorization program beginning in fiscal year 2019. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation had been implemented; however, they did not provide documentation to demonstrate actions taken to address the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should enroll private collection agencies in FSA's continuous monitoring program, and, in the interim, require these entities to test all controls at an FSA-defined frequency and regularly report the results. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: FSA stated that it concurred with this recommendation, but the actions it said it planned to take would not fully address it. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation had been implemented; however, they did not provide documentation to demonstrate actions taken to address the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should modify FSA's agreements with guaranty agencies to specify a required baseline of security controls based on the impact level of the information shared with these agencies, as determined by FSA. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: FSA concurred with this recommendation and described planned actions to address it. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation has a pending date of 5/31/2020 for completion When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should establish a process for continuous monitoring of guaranty agencies' implementation of security and privacy requirements between on-site assessments, to include testing all controls at an FSA-defined frequency and regularly reporting results. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: FSA partially concurred with this recommendation and described actions it planned to take in response. However, we believe the entire recommendation is still warranted. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation had been implemented; however, they did not provide documentation to demonstrate actions taken to address the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should include specific security and privacy requirements in agreements with the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) Program lenders based on FSA's categorization of the information shared with the lenders. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: FSA stated that it partially agreed with this recommendation; however, if effectively implemented, the planned actions it described would address this recommendation. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation had been implemented; however, they did not provide documentation to demonstrate actions taken to address the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should develop policies and procedures to gain assurance that FFEL lenders have appropriate security and privacy controls in place and that these controls are being regularly tested and monitored. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: FSA did not concur with this recommendation. However, we believe it is still warranted. In November 2019, FSA officials told us that this recommendation had been implemented; however, they did not provide documentation to demonstrate actions taken to address the recommendation. When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Chief Operating Officer of the Office of Federal Student Aid should develop a timeline for issuing a comprehensive guidance and instructions document for PSLF servicing. This could involve developing a new servicing manual or expanding upon the PSLF servicer's existing processing handbook. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open

Comments: Education agreed with this recommendation and reported in September 2019 that it was continuing its efforts to improve and streamline guidance for the PSLF servicer. While Education said it is working on developing its comprehensive PSLF servicing manual, it does not yet have a timeline for how it will complete this manual and has indicated that it intends to deliver completed chapters on an iterative basis based on servicing priorities. To implement this recommendation, Education needs to develop a timeline for completing the PSLF servicing manual and demonstrate that it will provide comprehensive guidance and instructions for PSLF servicing.

Recommendation: The Chief Operating Officer of the Office of Federal Student Aid should provide additional information to the PSLF servicer and borrowers to enhance their ability to determine which employers qualify for PSLF. This could involve Education developing an authoritative list of qualifying employers or improving the PSLF servicer's existing database, and making this information available to borrowers. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: Education agreed with this recommendation, and in December 2018, the agency released a new online tool to help borrowers better understand the PSLF eligibility requirements. Education has indicated that this tool could eventually be expanded to incorporate additional qualifying employer information. Education has also indicated that implementation of the recommendation is tied to the rollout of a new loan servicing system, which it expects to be fully operational in October 2021. To implement this recommendation, Education needs to demonstrate that it is providing information that will help the PSLF servicer and borrowers determine whether employment with specific employers will qualify borrowers for the program.

Recommendation: The Chief Operating Officer of the Office of Federal Student Aid should ensure that borrowers receive sufficiently detailed information from the PSLF servicer to be able to identify any errors in the servicer's counts of qualifying payments, including information on whether or not each payment qualified toward forgiveness. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Education: Office of Federal Student Aid
Status: Open

Comments: Education agreed with this recommendation, and in June 2020, reported that it is reviewing communications from the PSLF servicer to ensure that borrowers receive sufficiently detailed information regarding payment counts and payment history. Education also indicated that implementation of the recommendation is tied to the rollout of a new loan servicing system, which it expects to be fully operational in October 2021. We will close the recommendation once Education provides documentation of the changes in communications from the PSLF servicer that demonstrate borrowers are receiving sufficiently detailed information regarding payment counts and payment history.

Recommendation: Congress should consider strengthening schools' accountability for student loan defaults, for example, by 1) revising the cohort default rate (CDR) calculation to account for the effect of borrowers spending long periods of time in forbearance during the 3-year CDR period, 2) specifying additional accountability measures to complement the CDR, for example, a repayment rate, or 3) replacing the CDR with a different accountability measure. (Matter 1)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: In the 115th Congress, provisions were included in the Transparency in Student Loan Consultation Act of 2018 (H.R. 6473) to require schools and their default management consultants to provide borrowers with information that is accurate and complete. We will continue to monitor congressional action.

Recommendation: Congress should consider requiring that schools and default management consultants that choose to contact borrowers about their federal student loan repayment and postponement options after they leave school present them with accurate and complete information. (Matter 2)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: In the 116th Congress, legislation has been introduced to revise the cohort default rate calculation. The College Affordability Act (H.R. 4674), Acting on the Annual Duplication Report Act of 2019 (S. 2175), and Accountability in Student Loan Data Act (H.R. 4662) include provisions that, if enacted, would revise the cohort default rate calculation to change how borrowers who spend long periods in forbearance are accounted for in the calculation. We will continue to monitor congressional action.

Recommendation: To preserve the balance between the importance of repaying federal student loan debt and protecting a minimum level of Social Security benefits put in place by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, Congress should consider modifying Social Security administrative offset provisions, such as by authorizing the Department of the Treasury to annually index the amount of Social Security benefits exempted from administrative offset to reflect changes in the cost of living over time.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of December 2018, Congress has not yet taken action on this matter.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should inform affected borrowers of the suspension of offset and potential consequences if the borrower does not take action to apply for a TPD discharge. Such information could include notification that interest continues to accrue and that offsets may resume once their disability benefits are converted to retirement benefits.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education does not currently notify borrowers of the suspension of offset, but plans to implement a process to do so in the future using a new mailing sent to affected borrowers by their default servicer. The current budget situation does not allow for this type of enhancement, and it is not clear when that will change. In the interim, the agency is exploring alternative notification approaches that could be put in place prior to the implementation of an automated solution. Although Education reported in December 2018 that it has implemented this recommendation, we will consider closing it when we receive documentation that this effort has been completed. As of October 2020, Education's website includes information about the suspension of offset. However, affected borrowers may not know to check the website and the agency has not provided documentation that it has directly alerted affected borrowers.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should revise forms sent to borrowers already approved for a TPD discharge to clearly and prominently state that failure to provide annual income verification documentation during the 3-year monitoring period will result in loan reinstatement.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The FUTURE Act (H.R. 5363), signed into law on Dec. 19, 2019, requires the Department of Education (Education) to automate the income monitoring process for borrowers whose loans are discharged for total and permanent disability. As a result of automating the process, borrowers will no longer need to receive Education's forms requesting the borrower to individually provide their income verification documentation during the 3-year monitoring period.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should inform borrowers about the financial hardship exemption option and application process on the agency's website, as well as the notice of offset sent to borrowers.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education agrees with the recommendation and said that they will include this change in upcoming revisions to the agency's web content. The agency reported that the Notice of Offset to borrowers is sent by Treasury and that they will share this recommendation with Treasury and discuss possible changes to the notice. As of October 2020, Education's website notes that borrowers can request a review of their offset , but it does not specifically note that they may do so because of a financial hardship. Although Education reported in December 2018 that it has implemented this recommendation, we will consider closing it when we receive documentation that the agency has notified borrowers about the financial hardship exemption process on its website and the notice of offset sent to borrowers.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should implement an annual review process to ensure that only eligible borrowers are exempted from offset for financial hardship on an ongoing basis.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education reported that it plans to fully automate their process for tracking hardships and other exceptions from offset. However, due to competing priorities and funding limitations, full implementation of these improvements have not been scheduled. As they fully implement this process, they will review complementary strategies to assist borrowers in complying with annual reporting requirements. As of December 2018, Education reported that it is in the process of re-designing the student loan financial services environment, which will lead to major improvements such as offset exceptions. They are conducting market research on the new environment, then plan to develop requirements and timelines in support of a procurement with a projected completion in September 2020. We will consider closing this recommendation when we receive documentation that the agency has implemented an annual review process.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should assess and improve, as necessary, the quality of data and methods used to forecast borrower incomes, and revise the forecasting method to account for inflation in estimates.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Education agreed to assess and improve its borrower income data, and adjust incomes for inflation. In model documentation prepared in advance of the agency's fiscal year 2017 financial statements, Education acknowledged problems in the estimated borrower income data it used to estimate income-driven repayment (IDR) plan costs, and said it was working to obtain access to actual borrower income data for use in its cost estimates. Education implemented part of this recommendation by adjusting borrower incomes for inflation, which caused a downward re-estimate of IDR plan costs totaling $17.1 billion. GAO will monitor Education's progress in implementing the other part of the recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Education should complete efforts to incorporate repayment plan switching into the agency's redesigned student loan model, and conduct testing to help ensure that the model produces estimates that reasonably reflect trends in Income-Driven Repayment plan participation.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education (Education) agreed to incorporate repayment plan switching into its redesigned student loan model, reiterating that efforts to incorporate this capability into a new microsimulation model had begun despite challenges inherent in predicting borrower behavior. However, Education's current student loan model still does not allow for estimating the effects of repayment plan switching. In the interim, Education updated its repayment plan selection assumption to more accurately reflect recent trends in income-driven repayment plan participation. GAO will monitor the progress of Education's efforts to implement the planned model redesign with the capability to incorporate plan switching behavior.

Recommendation: To help ensure quality information is conveyed to servicemembers about how the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) interest rate cap applies to student loans, the Secretary of Defense should direct the secretaries of each service branch, and work with other secretaries as appropriate, to ensure that all information about the SCRA interest rate cap for student loans is accurate when provided to servicemembers and to those who work with servicemembers to help them obtain SCRA benefits, including information contained in outreach materials.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) disagreed with this recommendation believing it to be unnecessary because it is already providing accurate information. Specifically, DOD noted that the information provided in several documents GAO reviewed is accurately based on statute whereas Education's updated requirement to automatically apply the cap is based on policy that could change in the future. Moreover, the automated process applies only to federal and commercial FFEL student loans in contrast to other types of debt. DOD said that providing information based on statute rather than policy would cause less confusion and was a better approach than what we recommend. However, our report noted that Education formalized the automated process through federal regulations, effective July 2016, which legally require servicers to use this process for all federal and commercial FFEL loans. In addition, DOD said it was unable to verify whether DOD's Military OneSource website inaccurately states that the SCRA rate cap does not apply to commercial FFEL loans. However, our searches of the website still turned up this inaccuracy. DOD said it would look into a means of verifying website information but that in the meantime, it is satisfied that its training provides correct information. Given that Military OneSource is a key source of information for servicemembers and that some documents DOD provided state that the SCRA rate cap does not apply to student loans, we continue to believe that servicemembers are not always receiving accurate and up-to-date information. In August 2018, DOD reiterated that it continues to disagree with this recommendation based on the rationale above. DOD did not provide an update for 2020.

Recommendation: To ensure that all eligible servicemembers with student loans receive the SCRA interest rate cap, the Attorney General should direct the Department of Justice to consider modifying its proposed changes to SCRA to require use of the automatic eligibility check for private student loans.

Agency: Department of Justice: Office of the Attorney General
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Justice (DOJ) stated that its current package of proposed legislative changes provides benefits to servicemembers with all kinds of loans, including private student loans. Rather than requiring servicemembers to submit written notice and a copy of military orders, they need only give oral or written notice of eligibility for the cap to their creditors. Creditors would then have to search the Department of Defense's records to verify the servicemembers' military service and apply the SCRA interest rate cap, when applicable. DOJ believes that these changes would significantly benefit all servicemembers with loans while providing a uniform standard for all types of creditors. The department added that it will consider its proposed changes to SCRA in future legislative proposals and plans to obtain feedback from stakeholders on how to improve SCRA's protections for servicemembers. However, as stated in our report, servicemembers with private student loans would still need to be aware of the rate cap in order to give notice, whether written or oral. Therefore, we encourage DOJ to consider updating its current proposal to require use of the automatic eligibility check by all student loan lenders and servicers. Not only would this ensure that servicemembers with private student loans receive a benefit for which they are eligible, but also that the interest rate cap is applied consistently across all types of student loans. DOJ did not provide an update for 2020.

Recommendation: To better ensure that servicemembers with private student loans benefit from the SCRA interest rate cap, the Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Attorney General of the Department of Justice should coordinate with each other, and with the four federal financial regulators, as appropriate, to determine the best way to ensure routine oversight of SCRA compliance for all nonbank private student loan lenders and servicers. If CFPB and DOJ determine that additional statutory authority is needed to facilitate such oversight, CFPB and DOJ should develop a legislative proposal for Congress.

Agency: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Status: Open

Comments: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) stated that it is committed to working with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and federal financial regulators, when possible, to facilitate oversight of SCRA compliance and that it will support all relevant federal agencies in using their respective authorities to identify and address SCRA violations as efficiently and effectively as possible. While CFPB coordinates with DOJ and other federal regulators in general, there is still no single agency authorized to enforce SCRA compliance among nonbank private student loan lenders and servicers, and no entity is conducting onsite supervisory reviews of these lenders and servicers. In addition, while CFPB may refer complaints from servicemembers about the SCRA rate cap for private student loans to DOJ and other financial regulators, we believe this does not constitute routine, proactive oversight and also presumes servicemembers are aware of the SCRA rate cap. GAO will consider closing this recommendation when the bureau has provided evidence of actions it has taken to facilitate routine oversight of SCRA compliance for all nonbank private student loan lenders and servicers. CFPB did not provide an update for 2020.

Recommendation: To better ensure that servicemembers with private student loans benefit from the SCRA interest rate cap, the Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Attorney General of the Department of Justice should coordinate with each other, and with the four federal financial regulators, as appropriate, to determine the best way to ensure routine oversight of SCRA compliance for all nonbank private student loan lenders and servicers. If CFPB and DOJ determine that additional statutory authority is needed to facilitate such oversight, CFPB and DOJ should develop a legislative proposal for Congress.

Agency: Department of Justice: Office of the Attorney General
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Justice (DOJ) believes that it is in full compliance with this recommendation and that the four federal financial regulators do not have statutory authority to examine nonbank private student loan lenders and servicers unaffiliated with a depository institution. DOJ stated that it already coordinates extensively with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and the financial regulators concerning SCRA compliance through such mechanisms as referrals from CFPB for any SCRA-related violations and access to its consumer complaint database, and regular meetings with CFPB, and that it will continue to be built upon these efforts. While these mechanisms are commendable, GAO believes they do not constitute exercising routine oversight of nonbank private student loan lenders and servicers who are not affiliated with a depository institution. We believe that additional interagency coordination, including working with CFPB to seek additional statutory authority, as needed, is necessary to ensure routine SCRA compliance. DOJ did not provide an update for 2020.

Recommendation: To help ensure Interior can hire, retain, and train staff it needs to provide effective oversight of oil and gas activities on federal lands and waters, the Secretary of the Interior should direct the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget to annually evaluate the bureaus' training programs, including: (1) staff training needs, (2) training effectiveness, and (3) potential opportunities for the bureaus to share training resources.

Agency: Department of the Interior
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2017, Interior officials said the bureaus were developing, or had developed, the means by which they would assess their training needs and review, evaluate, and update their training programs for technical staff. Interior also told GAO that as part of its quarterly review of performance data, the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget will ensure that BLM, BSEE and BOEM are coordinating their training needs. Interior officials said that their Office of Strategic Employment and Organizational Development will validate the bureaus' active engagement in this activity and provide support in the fulfillment of this recommendation where needed. In February 2018, Interior officials said the agency had examined results from the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey to gauge how the bureaus' training program activities were being perceived by their workforce. In July 2019, Interior officials said they were looking at opportunities to share training resources, and that they would add in their scope an evaluation of training needs and effectiveness. However, as of March 2020, Interior had not provided us with evidence that it has conducted an evaluation of training needs, training effectiveness and sharing training resources.