Native Hawaiian Education Act: Greater Oversight Would Increase  
Accountability and Enable Targeting of Funds to Areas with	 
Greatest Need (25-MAR-08, GAO-08-422).				 
                                                                 
The Native Hawaiian Education Act (NHEA) seeks to develop	 
innovative educational programs to assist Native Hawaiians. The  
Department of Education (Education) administers NHEA and has	 
provided grants for a wide range of activities. Education is	 
authorized to establish a Native Hawaiian Education Council and  
seven island councils to help implement NHEA. To inform 	 
reauthorization, GAO was asked to analyze (1) what is known about
NHEA's impact on Native Hawaiian education, (2) Education's	 
efforts to oversee NHEA grants, and (3) the extent to which	 
Education and the Native Hawaiian councils have fulfilled their  
roles and responsibilities. To do this, GAO reviewed federal laws
and regulations and departmental documents, and interviewed	 
Education officials, council members, grantees, and experts in	 
Native Hawaiian education.					 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-08-422 					        
    ACCNO:   A81384						        
  TITLE:     Native Hawaiian Education Act: Greater Oversight Would   
Increase Accountability and Enable Targeting of Funds to Areas	 
with Greatest Need						 
     DATE:   03/25/2008 
  SUBJECT:   Accountability					 
	     Education						 
	     Education program evaluation			 
	     Educational facilities				 
	     Educational grants 				 
	     Educational standards				 
	     Federal funds					 
	     Federal grants					 
	     Government grants					 
	     Grant administration				 
	     Grants to states					 
	     Needs assessment					 
	     Performance management				 
	     Planning						 
	     Program management 				 
	     Reporting requirements				 
	     School management and organization 		 
	     Strategic planning 				 
	     Performance measures				 
	     Performance plans					 
	     Program goals or objectives			 
	     Hawaii						 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-08-422

   

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

Report to Congressional Requesters: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 

GAO: 

March 2008: 

Native Hawaiian Education Act: 

Greater Oversight Would Increase Accountability and Enable Targeting of 
Funds to Areas with Greatest Need: 

Native Hawaiian Education Act: 

GAO-08-422: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-08-422, a report to congressional requesters. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

The Native Hawaiian Education Act (NHEA) seeks to develop innovative 
educational programs to assist Native Hawaiians. The Department of 
Education (Education) administers NHEA and has provided grants for a 
wide range of activities. Education is authorized to establish a Native 
Hawaiian Education Council and seven island councils to help implement 
NHEA. To inform reauthorization, GAO was asked to analyze (1) what is 
known about NHEAï¿½s impact on Native Hawaiian education, (2) Educationï¿½s 
efforts to oversee NHEA grants, and (3) the extent to which Education 
and the Native Hawaiian councils have fulfilled their roles and 
responsibilities. To do this, GAO reviewed federal laws and regulations 
and departmental documents, and interviewed Education officials, 
council members, grantees, and experts in Native Hawaiian education. 

What GAO Found: 

Little is known about the NHEAï¿½s impact on Native Hawaiian education. 
Education has not evaluated NHEA due to its relatively small funding 
level, about $30 million annually, and academic research that shows 
educational improvements for Native Hawaiians does not indicate whether 
NHEA was a contributor to reported gains, such as in preschool 
enrollment and high school and college graduation rates. Some grantees 
have reported positive outcomes in education and other areas for Native 
Hawaiians served by NHEA grants. However, the extent to which NHEA has 
contributed to these outcomes has not been determined. 

Education has made efforts in recent years to improve NHEA grant 
management and oversight, and plans to address other weaknesses in the 
future. Education has established three performance measures that 
grantees are expected to use to assess their activities, conducted 
community outreach, and improved reporting requirements for grantees. 
However, these performance measures are not applicable to some of the 
educational outcomes that could result from NHEAï¿½s many activities. 
Moreover, Education has yet to establish a method to track grantee 
activities, such as how funds have been distributed across activities 
or islands, and some grantees said that in the past they have received 
little direction or guidance from Education. Education officials said 
they plan to address these weaknesses. They plan to reexamine the 
performance measures and provide additional guidance and technical 
assistance to grantees this year. Officials also stated that they would 
like to develop a tracking system to better manage grants funded by 
NHEA, but could not say specifically when this would occur. 

The parties responsible for administering NHEAï¿½Education, the Education 
Council, and the island councilsï¿½have not fulfilled many of their 
respective roles and responsibilities under the act. Education has not 
provided sufficient oversight to ensure that the Education Council 
carries out many of its responsibilities under the law, or provided 
guidance to the Education Council on how to assist island councils 
represent local interests. The Education Council has not fulfilled its 
primary duty to collect data on the status of Native Hawaiian 
education, assess current needs in the different communities, make 
recommendations for the future use of grant funds, or, until recently, 
provided Education with the required annual reports on its activities. 
In regard to the island councils, some have not ensured the adequate 
representation of local interests, or supported the Education Council 
in efforts to assess and prioritize local needs and make 
recommendations to Education. In the absence of complete information on 
NHEA activities and local needs, Education has not targeted grant funds 
or reported to Congress on NHEA activities, as required. The overall 
lack of information about NHEA leaves participants and policymakers in 
a knowledge vacuum, unable to make informed decisions that will help 
meet and advance NHEAï¿½s goals. 

What GAO Recommends: 

GAO recommends that, among other things, the Secretary of Education 
report to Congress on the activities under the act, establish 
additional performance measures, track grant activities, and provide 
more guidance and assistance to grantees and the Education Council. 
Education agreed with the majority of recommendations, but not fully or 
in part with two regarding establishing performance measures and 
tracking grant activities. GAO believes these recommendations remain 
valid. 

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on 
[hyperlink, http://www.GAO-08-422]. For more information, contact 
Cornelia M. Ashby @ (202) 512-7215 or [email protected]. 

[End of section] 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Appendix I: Briefing Slides: 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Education: 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Abbreviations: 

NCLBA: No Child Left Behind Act: 

NHEA: Native Hawaiian Education Act: 

PREL: Pacific Resources for Education and Learning: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 

Washington, DC 20548: 

March 25, 2008: 

The Honorable Byron L. Dorgan: 
Chairman: 
Committee on Indian Affairs: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Daniel K. Akaka: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye: 
United States Senate: 

The Native Hawaiian Education Act (NHEA), originally enacted in 1988 
and last reauthorized in 2002 as part of the No Child Left Behind Act 
(NCLBA), was designed to develop innovative educational programs for 
Native Hawaiians, who often experience academic disparities. Since 
2002, the Department of Education (Education) has provided about $30 
million annually for grants under the act to fund a wide range of 
prenatal through postsecondary education programs for Native Hawaiians. 
The act also authorized Education to establish a Native Hawaiian 
Education Council (Education Council) to--in conjunction with seven 
island councils--represent local interests, coordinate existing 
services, identify unmet needs, and make recommendations to Education 
for focusing future grant funds. The act also requires Education to 
report to Congress on activities conducted under the act. 

To respond to your interest in knowing whether implementation of NHEA 
has been effectively managed, we answered the following questions: 

* What is known about the impact of NHEA on Native Hawaiian education? 

* What is the status of Education's efforts to manage and oversee NHEA 
grants? 

* To what extent have Education, the Education Council, and island 
councils fulfilled their roles and responsibilities in implementing 
NHEA? 

On November 6, 2007, we briefed requesters' staff on the interim 
results of our work. This report formally conveys the information 
provided during that briefing and additional results developed after 
the briefing. (See app. I.) In summary, due to the lack of research 
linking activities under NHEA to outcomes for Native Hawaiians, we 
found that little is known about the act's impact on Native Hawaiian 
education. With respect to the management, oversight, and 
implementation of NHEA activities, Education and the councils have not 
fulfilled many of their roles and responsibilities. Education has, in 
the past, provided limited management and oversight of grant activities 
and little guidance to the Education Council, and the Education Council 
and island councils have not assessed the educational needs of Native 
Hawaiians as required. However, Education has plans for improving its 
management and oversight of NHEA grants, and Education and the 
Education Council are now collaborating on several efforts. More 
specifically: 

* We did not find any impact evaluations, studies, or other types of 
research linking activities under NHEA to changes in Native Hawaiian 
educational outcomes. While some grantees reported positive outcomes in 
education and other areas for Native Hawaiians served by NHEA grants, 
the extent to which grant activities contributed to these outcomes has 
not been determined. 

* Education established three performance measures that grantees are 
expected to use to assess their programs, conducted outreach to Native 
Hawaiian communities, and strengthened grantee reporting requirements. 
However, these performance measures are not applicable to all grant- 
funded activities. Moreover, Education has not tracked these 
activities, and some grantees told us they need more guidance and 
assistance from the department. Education plans, however, to reexamine 
the performance measures and provide more guidance and technical 
assistance to grantees this year. Education also plans to develop a 
tracking system to improve grant management, although department 
officials could not say specifically when this would occur. 

* Education did not report to Congress in 2006 as required, and 
although the department funds the Education Council's activities, it 
did not provide the council with sufficient guidance and oversight. 
Similarly, the Education Council--in conjunction with the island 
councils--has not fulfilled its duties to collect data on the status of 
Native Hawaiian education, coordinate available resources, assess 
current needs in the different communities, or make recommendations for 
the future use of grant funds. Nor has it, until recently, provided 
Education with past and current required annual reports on its 
activities. Further, we found that there is some concern about the 
composition of the Education Council and that some of the island 
councils have not adequately represented local interests. 

We are making the following seven recommendations to the Secretary of 
Education. 

To improve oversight of NHEA grantees, assess program activities, and 
fulfill Education's reporting responsibilities, we recommend that the 
Secretary: 

* establish additional or broader performance measures to cover the 
range of educational outcomes that could result from activities funded 
by NHEA and include in its report to Congress a time frame for when 
such action will be completed; 

* expedite development of a method to track how grant funds are 
allocated and spent across islands and activities, and include in its 
report to Congress a time frame for when development will be completed; 
and: 

* provide additional direction and guidance to NHEA grantees to help 
them fulfill their responsibilities and meet their stated goals, 
including their reporting requirements. 

To enable the department to provide grant funds aligned with local 
needs and priorities for improving educational outcomes for Native 
Hawaiians, we recommend that the Secretary: 

* work with the Education Council to identify and coordinate existing 
services for each of the islands; determine what needs remain unmet 
through a transparent, evidence-based process; and ensure that the 
Education Council provides the department the required annual reports 
on its activities; 

* provide guidance to the Education Council on actions it can take to 
best help the island councils represent local interests and determine 
local needs and priorities; and: 

* help ensure appropriate representation on the Education Council by 
reviewing the composition of the Education and island councils and, if 
necessary, advising them to appoint members who can ensure that needs 
are adequately identified across all communities. 

In addition, to provide Congress with information useful for program 
accountability and policy direction, we recommend that the Secretary 
fulfill the statutory responsibility to report to Congress on the 
activities of the Education Council and the allocation and use of grant 
funds, with policy recommendations for advancing the education of 
Native Hawaiians. If necessary, the report could explain why certain 
reporting requirements could not be met and what steps will be taken to 
provide the missing information in the future. 

To develop our findings, we first reviewed relevant federal laws, 
regulations, and existing literature and interviewed agency officials 
from Education. To further our understanding, we conducted site visits 
on the islands of Oahu, Hawaii, Kauai, and Molokai. During our site 
visits, we interviewed various stakeholders, including members of the 
Education Council and the six island councils that are currently in 
operation, officials from the Hawaii Department of Education, 
researchers and experts in Native Hawaiian education, and community 
members such as parents, teachers, and students. Additionally, we met 
with a judgmental sample of 22 current and former grantees selected for 
the range of services they provided, for priorities noted in the law, 
and for their geographic locations. Some of these grantees had received 
the largest grant amounts, and some were recommended by Education and 
the Education Council because they were considered particularly 
innovative or effective. We also reviewed a judgmental sample of 
performance reports of 25 grant projects for many of the grantees we 
visited to assess the extent to which grantees were reporting on the 
current performance measures established by Education.[Footnote 1] 
Further, we reviewed grant abstracts for 93 NHEA grants awarded between 
2003 and 2007 to determine what types of activities have been funded, 
and other documents from Education. We conducted our work between July 
2007 and March 2008 in accordance with generally accepted government 
auditing standards. 

We provided a draft of this report to the U.S. Department of Education 
for review and comment. Education's written comments are reprinted in 
appendix II. In written comments on our draft report, Education 
concurred with five of our seven recommendations and disagreed with the 
remaining recommendations in whole or in part. 

Specifically, Education concurred with our third, fourth, and fifth 
recommendations that grantees and the Education Council should receive 
additional direction and guidance to fulfill their responsibilities 
under the act, and has taken several actions, such as increasing 
department staff assigned to the Native Hawaiian program, holding 
workshops for grantees, and working with the Education Council's 
executive director on plans for conducting a needs assessment across 
islands to identify local needs and priorities. Education also agreed 
with our sixth recommendation to help ensure appropriate representation 
on the Education Council, and has begun a review of the council's 
bylaws and membership. Education also concurred with our seventh 
recommendation and said it will submit a report to Congress, as 
required by law, saying it would do so upon receipt of requested 
information from the Education Council. 

Education agreed, in part, with our first recommendation, that the 
department establish additional or broader performance measures to 
cover the range of educational outcomes that could result from NHEA 
activities. Education acknowledged that the current performance 
measures cover only a subset of authorized activities and agreed with 
the need to determine whether the department should modify or adopt 
additional measures that cover a broader range of activities. Education 
stated that it was working through the department's Data Quality 
Initiative to help refine performance measures and data collection 
practices. While Education said it expected to identify broader or 
alternative measures for the program by the end of this calendar year, 
it questioned the feasibility of developing measures that would cover 
each allowable activity. We applaud the department's efforts to improve 
its performance measures; however, we continue to believe that the 
department needs to be able to assess the educational outcomes for all 
funded activities. 

Education disagreed with our second recommendation, to track how grant 
funds are allocated and spent across islands and activities, saying 
that it would be burdensome to the grantee, and would require data and 
a tracking system that other programs do not require. Education 
described the current grants administration and payment system that 
tracks grant funds by administrative categories, such as personnel and 
supplies. Our recommendation was not intended to have the department 
track the fiscal expenditures of grantees. To clarify, our 
recommendation was intended to have the department track how funds are 
allocated across islands and the 11 activity categories authorized by 
the law, such as postsecondary education and curriculum development. As 
discussed in this report, Education officials could not tell us the 
extent to which federal funding supported the various activities under 
NHEA and where grantees were providing services. Our recommendation is 
in response to these conditions. Given that Education is required under 
the law to report to Congress describing the allocation and use of 
funds under NHEA, we continue to believe that tracking funds across 
NHEA activity categories and islands is necessary for Education to 
fulfill its statutory responsibilities. 

We are sending copies of this report to relevant congressional 
committees, the Secretary of Education, and other interested parties. 
We will also make copies available to others upon request. In addition, 
this report will be available at no charge on GAO's Web site at 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please 
contact me at (202) 512-7215. Contact points for our offices of 
Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last 
page of this report. Major contributions to this report are listed in 
appendix III. 

Signed by: 

Cornelia M. Ashby: 

Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Briefing Slides: 

Native Hawaiian Education Act: Greater Oversight Would Increase 
Accountability and Enable Targeting of Funds to Areas with Greatest 
Need: 

Briefing for Staff of Chairman Byron L. Dorgan and Senators Daniel K. 
Inouye and Daniel Akaka Senate Committee on Indian Affairs: 

November 6, 2007*: 

* Updated March 2008: 

Introduction: 

The Native Hawaiian Education Act (NHEA), last reauthorized in 2002 as 
part of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLBA), was enacted to 
develop innovative educational programs to assist Native Hawaiians* by 
providing grant funds for Native Hawaiian educational activities and 
fostering community participation in strategies for improvement. Since 
2002, Congress has designated about $30 million annually for NHEA. 

The NHEA authorized the Department of Education (Education) to: 

* make competitive grant awards to eligible organizations; 

* establish and fund a statewide Native Hawaiian Education Council 
(Education Council) to carry out the purposes of NHEA through the 
coordination of educational resources, assessment of local needs, and 
issuance of reports and recommendations to the department on issues 
related to Native Hawaiian education; and: 

* facilitate the establishment of seven individual island councils to 
carry out NHEAï¿½s purposes and to ensure adequate representation of 
island and community interests within the Education Council (see map of 
islands on the next slide).

(* As defined in the Native Hawaiian Education Act, Native Hawaiians 
are citizens of the United States who are descendants of the aboriginal 
people who occupied and exercised sovereignty in the area that now 
constitutes the state of Hawaii prior to 1778, as evidenced by 
genealogical or birth records or verification by elders or long-term 2 
unity residents. According to the 2000 Census, which is based on self-
reported data, Native Hawaiians alone or in combination with one or 
more other race, make up percent of the total U.S. population and 20 
percent of the state of Hawaiiï¿½s population.) 

Figure: Hawaii: 

This figure is a map of Hawaii. 

[See PDF for image] 

Source: GAO based on Map Resources. 

Note: Kahoolawe is an uninhabited island and does not have an island 
council. 

[End of table] 

Objectives: 

In view of pending reauthorization of NCLBA and due to concerns about 
whether NHEA is fostering better educational outcomes and is being 
administered and managed effectively to meet the most pressing needs of 
Native Hawaiians, GAO was asked to answer the following questions: 

1. What is known about the impact of NHEA on Native Hawaiian education?

2. What is the status of Educationï¿½s efforts to manage and oversee NHEA 
grants?

3. To what extent have Education, the Education Council, and island 
councils fulfilled their roles and responsibilities in implementing 
NHEA?

Scope and Methodology: 

To answer these questions, we: 

reviewed relevant federal laws and regulations and existing literature 
on Native Hawaiian education and needs; 

conducted site visits on the islands of Oahu, Hawaii, Kauai, and 
Molokai, covering each of Hawaiiï¿½s four major counties; 

reviewed a judgmental sample of performance reports of 25 grant 
projects for many of the grantees we visited,* abstracts of 93 grants 
awarded between 2003 and 2007 and other documents from Education; and: 

interviewed officials from the U.S. Department of Education. 

(* Some grantees had multiple grant projects. GAO reviewed at least one 
performance report for each of the current grantees we visited. 
However, we generally did not review the performance reports of former 
grantees because their grant projects had ended prior to the 
establishment of the  current performance measures in 2004.) 

During our site visits, we met with: 

* twenty-two current or former NHEA grantees that reflect a diversity 
of geographic locations and services, including those receiving some of 
the largest grant amounts in recent years, and those considered by the 
department and the Education Council to be innovative or effective; 

* officials from the Hawaii Department of Education; 

* the Education Council and island council members from the islands of 
Hawaii, Molokai, Lanai, Oahu, Kauai, and Niihau (Mauiï¿½s council 
disbanded in 2006); 

* researchers and experts in Native Hawaiian education from Kamehameha 
Schools, Pacific Resources for Education and Learning (PREL), and the 
University of Hawaii at Manoa and Hilo; and: 

* community members such as parents, teachers, and students. 

We conducted this performance audit from July 2007 to March 2008 in 
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Summary of Findings: 

There are few data available for determining the impact of NHEA, 
although research indicates progress for Native Hawaiians in some 
areas, and some grantees have reported positive changes among those 
served by NHEA grants.

Education has taken limited steps to improve grant management and 
oversight, but plans to address some weaknesses in the future. 

Administering parties have not fulfilled many of their respective roles 
and responsibilities to fully implement NHEA, such as ensuring that 
needs are identified so funds can be appropriately targeted. 

Background: 

History and Purpose of NHEA: 

Originally enacted in 1988 and last reauthorized in 2002 as part of 
NCLBA, the NHEA was designed to develop innovative educational programs 
for Native Hawaiians, who often experience academic disparities. As 
noted in the 2001 law: 

Native Hawaiian students score below national norms on standardized 
education achievement tests at all grade levels. 

They are also overrepresented in special education, but 
underrepresented in gifted and talented programs and postsecondary 
institutions. 

NHEA Funding for Educational Activities: 

From 2002 through 2007:

Nearly $30 million to over $33 million was designated annually for 
grants to organizations in Hawaii to develop innovative educational 
programs or expand existing ones.

* Education reports awarding over 100 different grants to more than 30 
organizations in Hawaii.

* Entities eligible for NHEA funds include Native Hawaiian educational 
or community-based organizations, and other public and private 
nonprofit organizations that have experience developing or operating 
Native Hawaiian programs, or a consortia of these entities. 

A total of $500,000 of the funds designated annually is reserved for a 
direct grant to the Education Council to carry out its responsibilities 
under the law. 

Grant Activities: 

The NHEA, as amended by NCLBA, authorizes grantees to carry out a wide 
range of activities:* 

1. development and maintenance of a statewide Native Hawaiian early 
education care system;

2. operation of family-based education centers to deliver, conduct 
research on, and assess early childhood and preschool programs for 
Native Hawaiians;

3. beginning reading and literacy in Hawaiian or English for Native 
Hawaiian students in kindergarten through third grade and addressing 
combined English and Hawaiian literacy for Hawaiian students in fifth 
and sixth grades; 

4. meeting the special needs of Native Hawaiian students with 
disabilities;

5. meeting the special needs of Native Hawaiian students who are gifted 
and talented (list continued on next slide);

(* In addition, competitive preference is given to project grants that 
address one of the four priorities in the law: (1) beginning reading 
and literacy among students in grades K-3, (2) needs of at-risk youth, 
(3) needs of fields or disciplines in which Native Hawaiians are 
underemployed, and (4) use of Native Hawaiian language in instruction.)

6. academic and vocational curriculum development to address the needs 
of Native Hawaiian children and adults; 

7. professional development for educators of Native Hawaiian students; 

8. community-based learning centers that address the needs of Native 
Hawaiian families and communities; 

9. postsecondary education for Native Hawaiians; 

10. research, data collection, or evaluation on Native Hawaiianï¿½s 
educational status and needs and programs under NHEA; and: 

11. other activities consistent with the purposes of the program to 
meet the educational needs of Native Hawaiian children and adults.  

Roles and Responsibilities: 

As specified in the law, Education: 

* is authorized to award direct grants to eligible organizations; 

* is authorized to establish the Education Council and facilitate the 
establishment of seven island councils;

* appoints members of the Education Council based on recommendations 
from the Native Hawaiian community;* and: 

* was required to submit to Congress by January 2006 a report that 
summarizes annual reports of the Education Council, describes the 
allocation and use of NHEA funds, and recommends policy changes to 
advance the purposes of the program.

As grantor of NHEA funds to grantees and the Education Council, 
Education is responsible for: 

* monitoring compliance with grant requirements and overseeing grantee 
performance and: 

* overseeing and providing guidance to the Education Council and island 
councils.

(* Additional conditions and terms relating to Education Council 
membership, including term lengths and term renewals, are required to 
be determined by a majority of the Education Council.) 

The law specifies the duties and composition of the Education Council. 

Duties:

* coordinate educational and related services and programs available to 
Native Hawaiians and assess the extent to which these meet the needs of 
Native Hawaiians; 

* collect data on the status of Native Hawaiian education; 

* make recommendations to appropriate federal, state, and local 
agencies to focus and improve the use of resources related to Native 
Hawaiian education; 

* prepare and submit annual reports to Education on its activities; 
and: 

* provide administrative and financial assistance to the island 
councils, as determined by Education to be appropriate.

Composition:

* Unless otherwise determined by a majority of the Education Council, 
no more than 21 members, serving for 3 years. 

* At least 10 members shall be Native Hawaiian education service 
providers; 10 members shall be Native Hawaiians or Native Hawaiian 
education consumers; and a representative of the State of Hawaii Office 
of Hawaiian Affairs shall also serve as a member. 

The law specifies the purpose and composition of the island councils. 

Purpose:

* Assist with advancement of NHEAï¿½s purposes. 

* Ensure the adequate representation of island and community interests 
within the Education Council.

Duties:

* Meet at least four times each calendar year. 

Composition of island councils: 

* Each island council shall consist of parents, students, and other 
community members who have an interest in the education of Native 
Hawaiians, and shall be representative of individuals concerned with 
the educational needs of all age groups, and three-fourths of the 
members must be Native Hawaiians. 

Objective 1: Availability of Impact Information

Few data exist to determine NHEA's impact, though some grantees have 
reported positive outcomes for those served by their projects. 

No study or evaluation has been conducted to determine the impact of 
NHEA on educational outcomes. 

Some research does show improvements for Native Hawaiians, but these 
study results cannot be linked to NHEA. 

Granteesï¿½ performance reports showed some positive outcomes for those 
served by their projects, but the extent to which NHEA has contributed 
to these outcomes has not been determined. Little data exist to 
determine NHEAï¿½s impact, though some grantees have reported positive 
outcomes for those served by their projects.

No study or evaluation has been conducted to determine the impact of 
NHEA on educational outcomes. 

Education has not conducted evaluations of NHEAï¿½s educational outcomes.

* Education has not employed the Program Assessment Rating Toolï¿½the 
Office of Management and Budgetï¿½s (OMB) governmentwide method for 
evaluating the effectiveness of federal programsï¿½because OMB generally 
does not require programs under $40 million to conduct such an 
evaluation, according to department officials.

* Education has not conducted or sponsored any other research to 
determine NHEAï¿½s impact.

Other organizations performing research in the area of Native Hawaiian 
education have not conducted studies evaluating the overall impact of 
NHEA.

Academic research comparing Census data from 1990 and 2000 showed some 
improvements in school enrollment for Native Hawaiians.* 

* Preschool enrollment of Native Hawaiians increased and was about 
proportionate to their numbers in the general population of 3ï¿½ and 
4ï¿½year olds. 

* High school graduation and college enrollment rates increased 
slightly, though they were still below Hawaii statewide averages. 

The same research examining state achievement test data between 1992 
and 2000 showed some improvements in reading and math. 

* The gap between Native Hawaiian and non-Native Hawaiian middle school 
students in reading proficiency decreased by 20 percent. 

* The gap between Native Hawaiian and non-Native Hawaiian high school 
students in math proficiency decreased by 24 percent. 

This research, however, does not indicate whether the NHEA was a 
contributor to these improvements for Native Hawaiians. 

(* See Shawn K. Kanaï¿½iaupuni, Nolan Malone, and Koren Ishibashi. ï¿½Ka 
huakaï¿½i: 2005 Native Hawaiian Educational Assessmentï¿½ (Honolulu, 
Hawaii: Kamehameha Schools, Pauahi Publications, 2005). 

Granteesï¿½ performance reports showed some positive outcomes for those 
served by their projects. 

Granteesï¿½ performance reports showed some positive outcomes for those 
served by their projects. 

Granteesï¿½ annual and final performance reports measuring student 
progress showed some positive outcomes across various levels of 
education. 

improvements in vocabulary for students in early education programs;  

improvements in reading scores among students in elementary school and 
math and reading scores among those in high school; 

greater interest in science among students participating in a science 
career mentoring program; and: 

increases in the number of students enrolling in college through the 
provision of scholarships to those in financial need. 

Interviewed grantees described some other benefits: 

* building program capacity to serve more people and provide better 
services; 

* revitalizing Hawaiian language and culture; 

* engaging parents and the community; and: 

* improving studentsï¿½ sense of self-identity and self-esteem. 

However, the extent to which NHEA has contributed to these outcomes 
among students receiving services has not been determined. 

Objective 2: Grant Management and Oversight: 

Education has taken limited steps to improve grant management and 
oversight, and plans to address remaining weaknesses in the future.

Steps to improve grant management and oversight include establishing 
some performance measures, conducting community outreach, and 
strengthening grantee reporting requirements. 

Education has yet to establish performance measures for all activities, 
develop a system to track grant activities, and provide sufficient 
guidance and assistance to grantees.

Education plans to address these weaknesses in the future. 

Education has established some performance measures. 

To meet government standards for performance and accountability, in 
2004, Education established three GPRA* performance measures of program 
performance: 

* improvements in school readiness and literacy for children in early 
education programs;

* increases in the number of students meeting or exceeding proficiency 
standards in math, science, or reading; and: 

* increases in the percentage of teachers who participate in 
professional development relating to Native Hawaiian education. 

Grantees are expected to use these measures to the extent they apply 
when reporting on their progress and outcomes.

(* The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) was 
enacted to improve federal program effectiveness, accountability, and 
service delivery and enhance congressional decision making by providing 
more objective information on program performance.) 

Education has taken other steps to improve the grant process. 

Since 2004, the department has: 

* performed community outreach to encourage a greater number of grant 
applications;

* conducted information sessions on what is required in the grant 
application; and: 

* improved the rigor of grantee reporting requirements to include 
quantifiable baseline data, yearly goals, and annual progress. 

Education has not established performance measures relevant to some 
activities funded by the NHEA. 

Established measures do not always apply, and are not relevant to 
educational outcomes that could result from some grant activities: 

* Grantees are not required to use established measures if they do not 
apply to their project activities and may instead establish their own 
measures. 

* Our review of a sample of 25 performance reports covering reporting 
periods between 2005 and 2007 found that 11 of 25 grant projects did 
not report on any of the three GPRA measures. 

* Our review of 93 grant abstracts indicated that established 
performance measures may not be relevant to activities frequently 
funded over the past 5 years, such as higher education and curriculum 
development* (see next slide). 

Education officials noted that it has been difficult to establish a set 
of relevant performance measures for such a broad range of activities. 

As a result of the broad range of allowable activities, Educationï¿½s 
established measures cannot be used to measure performance of all 
activities. 

(* GPRA measures may have been relevant to other activities funded 
under the same grants.) 

Grants awarded from 2003 through 2007 fall within 11 categories of 
activities. 

Figure: 

This figure is a horizontal bar graph. The X axis represents number of 
activities, and the X axis represents the activity categories. 

Activity category: Development of a statewide early education and care 
system; 
Number of Activities 3. 

Activity category: Family-based education centers to deliver early 
childhood and preschool programs; 
Number of Activities 20. 

Activity category: Beginning reading and literacy in Hawaiian or 
English; 
Number of Activities 12. 

Activity category: Specific needs related to disabilities; 
Number of Activities 3. 

Activity category: Gifted and talented programs; 
Number of Activities 5. 

Activity category: Curriculum development; 
Number of Activities 34. 

Activity category: Professional development for educators; 
Number of Activities 27. 

Activity category: Community-based learning criteria that address the 
needs of families and communities; 
Number of Activities 13. 

Activity category: Postsecondary education; 
Number of Activities 17. 

Activity category: Research and data on Native Hawaiian' educational 
status and needs or on programs under NHEA; 
Number of Activities 10. 

Activity category: Other activities consistent with NHEA's purpose; 
Number of Activities 4. 

[See PDF for image] 

Source: GAO analysis of abstracts from Education of grants awarded 
under the NHEA program between fiscal years 2003 and 2007. 

Note: Many of the 93 grant abstracts we reviewed addressed multiple 
categories of activities. 

[End of program] 

Stakeholders cited other weaknesses in the current performance 
measures. 

While some grantees were satisfied with the current measures, other 
grantees, as well as some Education Council and island council members, 
and researchers said they were not always appropriate or adequate: 

lacked a component to support programs that integrate and help preserve 
Native Hawaiian language and culture; 

failed to consider outcomes such as improvements in attendance rates, 
grades, personal self-esteem, or community involvement; and: 

prematurely asked for outcomes that may not be realized until after the 
3-year grant cycle. 

Education also lacks a system to track funded activities. 

Education lacks a method to track grant activities. In response to our 
request for information, officials: 

did not have a list available showing grantees that provide services on 
the different islands and: 

could not provide a summary of how funds had been spent across activity 
categories, such as early education or higher education. 

Educationï¿½s guidance and assistance to grantees have been limited. 

Some grantees we interviewed stated that they have received limited 
assistance from Education:

* lack of feedback on project evaluations submitted by grantees in 
their performance reports and: 

* limited technical assistance for preparing annual reports and 
ensuring fiscal accountability. 

Grantees wanted support in several areas to improve their performance:  

* information on promising practices or related research to use 
resources more efficiently and avoid ï¿½reinventing the wheel;ï¿½ 

* guidance and technical assistance to establish performance measures, 
collect and analyze data, and conduct evaluations; and: 

* local assistance for first-time grantees to help them meet grant 
requirements. 

Education plans to address weaknesses. 

This year, Education plans to: 

* Provide more guidance and technical assistance. According to 
officials, the plan is to: 

- review all granteesï¿½ budgets and performance reports to identify 
grantees that are at risk of not meeting their financial and project 
goals or complying with program requirements and: 

- provide more guidance to grantees, such as in reporting, as well as 
technical assistance to those at risk. 

* Reexamine the three performance measures and seek input from grantees 
and others. However, officials did not know how or when measures would 
be changed if they determined this was appropriate. 

At some point in the future, Education would like to develop a tracking 
system to better manage grants funded by NHEA. 

Responsible parties have not fulfilled many of their respective roles 
and responsibilities under NHEA. 

Objective 3: Fulfillment of Roles and Responsibilities: 

Education has not provided sufficient direction and guidance to the 
Native Hawaiian Education Council and island councils, or submitted the 
required report to Congress. 

The Education Council has not conducted a needs assessment, provided 
recommendations for targeting grant funds, or, until very recently, 
provided annual reports to Education. 

Island councils may not have adequately represented local interests. 

Education has not provided sufficient direction and guidance to the 
Education Council and island councils or submitted its report to 
Congress. 

Education officials said that other priorities and lack of complete 
information have precluded the department from: 

providing sufficient direction and guidance to the Education Council on 
how to fulfill its responsibilities, including assisting the island 
councils to represent local interests; and: 

reporting to Congress, as required in January of 2006, with a summary 
of the annual reports from the Education Council, a description of the 
allocation and use of funds, and recommendations for policy changes to 
advance NHEA. 

The Education Council has not performed its duties to identify and 
report on local needs.

The Education Council has not: 

* conducted needs assessments; 

* coordinated available resources; 

* collected data on the status of Native Hawaiian education in Hawaii; 

* made recommendations to Education for targeting grant funds; 

* provided sufficient assistance to the island councils to help them 
fulfill their roles and responsibilities; and: 

* submitted timely annual reports on its activities to Education. 

Lack of relevant grantee information from the department may have 
affected the councils ability to perform some of its duties, according 
to some Education Council members. 

Concerns were raised by grantees and council members about the 
appropriateness of having current grantees sit on the Education Council 
insofar as this body has responsibility for making recommendations for 
tie use of future grant funds. 

Island councils may not have adequately represented local interests or 
helped further the advancement of NHEA. 

Lack of direction and capacity may have affected some island councilsï¿½ 
ability to: 

ensure adequate representation of local interest within the Education 
Council:

* One island, Maui, lacks any representation because the council 
disbanded in 2006, in disagreement with the Education Council over the 
use of funds. 

* Island councils may not be representative of all communitiesï¿½ 
interests, according to some grantees. 

assist the Education Council in advancing purposes of NHEA: 

* Island councils, except Kauai, have not assessed and reported on 
community needs and priorities. 

* Until recently, most island councils were spending their monies for 
direct services and other activities, which the Education Council does 
not view as appropriate in advancing the purposes of NHEA. 

Parties administering NHEA are taking steps to fulfill their roles and 
responsibilities. 

Education has conducted some outreach to the Education Council and 
grantee communities with a few site visits, and has plans to work more 
closely with the Education Council to prioritize its activities. 

Over the last 2 years, the Education Council has started to build 
relationships with the department and strategic partners in the 
community, and has established some fiscal control over island 
councilsï¿½ use of NHEA funds.

Most island councils are recognizing the need to identify available 
resources and assess local needs. A few island councils have: 

* hosted meetings with grantees and: 

* informally surveyed community members to identify community needs. 

Program participants also cited additional "impediments" to meeting 
NHEA'goals. 

Lack of consensus among Education, grantees, and island council members 
as to whether funds should be awarded primarily as seed money or for 
project expansion.

Absence of a grant requirement for collaboration and community 
involvement that could promote effectiveness and sustainability. 

Disagreement about cultural preservation as a goal of NHEA. 

Lack of information sharing, such as through a Web-based clearinghouse 
for use by the Education Council and grantees. 

Perceptions of traditional hierarchies, patronage, and conflicts of 
interest among the council members. 

Concerns about the lawï¿½s low ceiling on administrative costs and its 
impact on the financial viability of small organizations. 

Conclusions: 

While some individual grantees have reported successes, the lack of 
research and evaluations has made it difficult to determine the overall 
impact of NHEA on Native Hawaiian education. 

The relatively low funding level of NHEA activities may not warrant a 
comprehensive impact evaluation. 

However, Education has not established a method to capture basic 
information related to grantee activities. 

Without sufficient and relevant performance measures in place to 
appropriately assess all the activities funded by NHEA, or a method to 
track how funds have been spent, Education is unable to effectively 
assess activities and outcomes, manage and oversee grants, 
strategically target future resources, and report to Congress on NHEAï¿½s 
activities, as required. 

The size of the funding levels under NHEA is small relative to other 
Education programs, and until recently, Education has paid little 
attention to the management and oversight of NHEA grants. However, 
moving forward, it will be important for Education to fulfill its 
stated intention to reexamine the performance measures, implement a 
system to track and monitor grantee activities, and provide additional 
direction and guidance to grantees. 

Without appropriate oversight to ensure that the Education Council 
carries out many of its responsibilitiesï¿½primarily determining the most 
urgent unmet needs across the state and providing the department with 
annual reports on its activitiesï¿½Education will continue to lack the 
information it needs to best target funding for future grant cycles and 
report to Congress on the activities under NHEA as required.

* In view of the wide range of activities allowed under NHEA, an 
evidence-based assessment of local needs and priorities is critical for 
leveraging the programï¿½s limited funds. 

* Concerns of Education Council and island council members as well as 
grantees about appropriate representation suggest that more guidance 
from Education may be needed to ensure that appointed members can 
adequately represent local interests. 

Recommendations for Executive Action: 

To improve oversight of NHEA grantees, assess program activities, and 
fulfill Educationï¿½s reporting responsibilities, we recommend that the 
Secretary of Education: 

establish additional or broader performance measures to cover the range 
of educational outcomes that could result from activities funded by 
NHEA, and include in its report to Congress a time frame for when such 
action will be completed;

expedite development of a method to track how grant funds are allocated 
and spent across islands and activities, and include in its report to 
Congress a time frame for when development will be completed; and: 

provide additional direction and guidance to NHEA grantees to help them 
fulfill their responsibilities and meet their stated goals, including 
their reporting requirements. 

To enable the department to provide grant funds aligned with local 
needs and priorities for improving educational outcomes for Native 
Hawaiians, we recommend that the Secretary: 

work with the Education Council to identify and coordinate existing 
services for each of the islands, determine what needs remain unmet 
through a transparent and evidence-based process, and ensure that the 
Education Council provides the department the required annual reports 
on its activities; 

provide guidance to the Education Council on actions it can take to 
best help the island councils represent local interests and determine 
local needs and priorities; and: 

help ensure appropriate representation on the Education Council by 
reviewing the composition of the Education and island councils and, if 
necessary, advising them to appoint members who can ensure that needs 
are adequately identified across all communities. 

To provide Congress with information useful for program accountability 
and policy direction, we recommend that the Secretary fulfill 
Educationï¿½s statutory requirement by reporting to Congress: 

* the activities of the Education Council, 

* the allocation and use of grant funds, and: 

* policy recommendations to advance the education of Native Hawaiians.  

The report could contain reasons why certain reporting requirements 
could not be met, and what steps will be taken to provide the missing 
information in the future.

[End of section] 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Education: 

United States Department Of Education: 
Office Of Elementary And Secondary Education: 

600 Independence Ave. S.W.: 
Washington. D.C. 20202-6100: 

Our mission is to ensure equal access to education and to promote 
educational excellence throughout the Nation. 

The Assistant Secretary: 

March 13, 2008:  

Ms. Cornelia M. Ashby: 
Director: 
Education, Workforce and Income Security Issues: 
Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street, NW: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

Dear Ms. Ashby: 

I am writing in response to your request for comments on the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) draft report (GAO 08-422), dated March 
2008, entitled "Native Hawaiian Education Act Greater Oversight Would 
Increase Accountability and Enable Targeting of Funds to Areas with 
Greatest Need." I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the draft 
report. 

The following are responses to the specific recommendations in the 
report calling for the Department to take actions to increase oversight 
and accountability in order to target funds to areas with the greatest 
need: 

Recommendation I. Establish additional or broader performance measures 
to cover the range of educational outcomes that could result from 
activities funded by the Native Hawaiian Education Act (NHEA) and 
include in its report to Congress a time frame for when such action 
will be completed. 

The Department agrees in part with the recommendation that the 
performance measures need to be re-examined to capture the actual 
performance of the program. 

Section 7205(a)(3) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) 
of 1965, as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, 
authorizes a wide range of very diverse activities and services for 
Native Hawaiian grantees, When we first developed performance measures 
for this program, we faced the challenge of identifying indicators that 
would cover the full spectrum of funded activities. At the time, we 
selected indicators that we believed would best capture the success and 
progress of the overall program. However, the current performance 
measures cover only a subset of the authorized activities. 

We acknowledge the need to determine whether the Department should 
adopt additional performance measures that cover a broader range of the 
activities carried out under the program, or modify the current 
measures. However, given the wide range of allowable activities and 
services under the Act, it would be extremely difficult, if not 
impossible, and not meaningful to develop measures that would cover 
each allowable activity. 

We are currently working through the Department's Data Quality 
Initiative (which has been successful in helping other Department 
programs refine their GPRA measures and their performance data 
collection practices) on this effort. We are hopeful that this endeavor 
will result in refined, or possibly additional, measures that will 
allow for improved and consistent reporting on the programs and 
services funded by NHEA grants. We expect to identify broader or 
alternative measures for the program by the end of this calendar year. 

Recommendation 2. Expedite development of a method to track how grant 
funds are allocated and spent across islands and activities, and 
include in its report to Congress a time frame for when development 
will be completed. 

To the extent that GAO is recommending that the Department develop a 
method to track the fiscal expenditures of Native Hawaiian grantees by 
activity or services, we do not concur with this recommendation. 

When any applicant for a discretionary grant submits a proposal to the 
Department, it includes a standard budget form (Standard Form (SF) 424) 
that is divided into ten general line item categories: personnel, 
fringe benefits, travel, equipment, supplies, contractual, 
construction, other, indirect costs, and training stipends. Costs for 
some grant activities may include expenditures that fit into several 
categories. From the SF 424, we would have information on how grant 
funds will be spent in each of the ten categories to achieve the 
project's goals and objectives, but we would not be able to know how 
much a grantee has requested for each activity in its application. To 
request information for each activity would be very burdensome on the 
grantee, and would require data that other programs do not require. 

After we make the grant award, we monitor a grantee's general draw-down 
activity through our Grants Administration and Payment System (GAPS). 
However, the GAPS system does not give us information on how much is 
spent on each activity. We can examine the total amount that the 
grantee has drawn down, but we do not know what activity ï¿½ or budget 
line item ï¿½ the expenditure covers. If we have concerns about the size 
of the draw-down request, we contact the grantee for additional 
information. 

Our best tools for monitoring expenditures are our annual performance 
report, grant monitoring, and the single annual audit. The annual 
performance report requires grantees to report actual budget 
expenditures and to identify unexpended (carryover) funds. Again, this 
information is based on the original budget line items and categories 
of expenditures; however, because grantees are reporting actual 
expenditures and are linking those expenditures to grant performance, 
we are likely to have a better understanding of how grant funds were 
used to support grant activities. Additionally, when we conduct on-site 
monitoring we are able to review the grantee's fiscal records to ensure 
that the expenditures are allowable and support the activities 
described in the grant proposal. Further, the annual single audits 
provide additional oversight on the expenditures made by grantees and 
whether they are allowable. 

In sum, the Native Hawaiian program is using the tools and resources 
that all other discretionary grant programs use, and requiring the 
development of a separate system to track how grant funds are allocated 
and spent across islands and activities in greater detail would be 
extremely burdensome and not practical. 

Recommendation 3. Provide additional direction and guidance to NHEA 
grantees to help them fulfill their responsibilities and meet their 
stated goals, including their reporting requirements. 

The Department acknowledges the importance of adequate guidance and 
direction, and concurs with the recommendation that grantees should 
receive additional guidance, especially related to reporting 
requirements. This is a recommendation that is already being 
implemented. 

Over the past several years, we have worked closely with the program 
applicants and grantees to identify areas to provide needed technical 
assistance and support. In 2005, program staff conducted application 
workshops for program applicants in Hawaii. This technical assistance 
was provided to applicants ï¿½ both first-time and veteran ï¿½ in helping 
them apply for grant funds and design more effective programs. In 2006, 
program staff held a grantee meeting in Hawaii, and provided technical 
assistance on topics including the following: reporting requirements, 
performance indicators, carryover, no-cost time extensions, and other 
general budget management issues. Most recently, in January 2008, 
program staff held a project directors' meeting in Oahu with over 100 
grantees in attendance. Staff members held sessions on topics including 
reporting, performance monitoring and evaluation, and budget 
management. 

As a result of these efforts, and through increased grant monitoring, 
we have identified additional areas of needed technical assistance. We 
have recently increased the number of Department personnel assigned to 
the Native Hawaiian program and are committed to continuing our 
technical assistance efforts, particularly in the areas of data 
collection, analysis, and the synthesis of data for program 
improvement. 

Recommendation 4. Work with the Education Council to identify and 
coordinate existing services for each of the islands, determine what 
needs remain unmet through a transparent and evidence-based process, 
and ensure that the Education Council provides the department the 
required annual reports on its activities. 

Recommendation 5. Provide guidance to the Education Council on actions 
it can take to best help the island councils represent local interests 
and determine local needs and priorities. 

The Department agrees with Recommendations 4 and 5, and has already 
begun to implement these recommendations. In the fall of 2007, we met 
with the executive director of the Education Council to discuss how the 
Council could conduct a needs assessment across the islands in order to 
better identify the local needs and priorities. We requested that the 
Council include this plan with its other annual reports that were due 
to the Department by December 2007. 

We have reviewed the plans and reports and have had a follow-up 
discussion with the Council regarding its submission. We recently sent 
the Council a written request for additional information so that we can 
fully analyze the plan, and so that it can be enhanced if necessary. 
Once we have received the additional information we will be able to 
determine whether the Council's plans, among other things, adequately 
include and address local interests and priorities. 

Recommendation 6. Help ensure appropriate representation on the 
Education Council by reviewing the composition of the Education and 
island councils and, if necessary, advising them to appoint members who 
can ensure that needs are adequately identified across all communities. 

The Department agrees with the importance of ensuring appropriate 
representation on the Council, but notes that its ability to help the 
Council in selecting members is restricted by the authorizing statute. 

The NHEA provides significant flexibility to the Council with regard to 
member composition, membership, and term length. Although the statute 
provides certain conditions and terms related to membership, most of 
the requirements may be overridden by a majority of the Council (See ï¿½ï¿½ 
7240(b) & (c)(4)). 

In December 2007, the Department received a copy of the bylaws of the 
Council, as well of a list of the current members. We are reviewing the 
bylaws to ensure that the Council is complying with the rules and laws 
it has established for itself. Additionally, we are reviewing the list 
of current members and will provide guidance to the Council on the 
appointment of new and continuation council members. The review of the 
Council's submission under Recommendations 4 and 5 above will also help 
us ensure that there is adequate representation across the islands. 

Recommendation 7: To provide Congress with information useful for 
program accountability and policy direction, we recommend that the 
Secretary fulfill Education's statutory requirement by reporting to 
Congress the activities of the Education Council, the allocation and 
use of grant funds, and policy recommendations to advance the education 
of Native Hawaiians. The report could contain reasons why certain 
reporting requirements could not be met, and what steps will be taken 
to provide the missing information in the future. 

The Department agrees with this recommendation, and is already taking 
steps to implement this recommendation. As noted above, we have 
thoroughly reviewed the Council's annual plan and reports and have 
recently sent the Council a written request for additional information 
so that we can complete our review of the materials. We will complete 
the report to Congress as soon as we have sufficient responses to our 
requests for additional information from the Council. 

We appreciate the opportunity to share our comments and plans. If you 
need additional information, please contact Ms. Sylvia Lyles at 202-260-
2551 or by email at: [email protected].

Sincerely,

Signed by: 

Kerri L. Briggs, Ph. D.

[End of section] 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

Cornelia M. Ashby, Director, at (202) 512-7215 or [email protected]. 

Staff Acknowledgments: 

Lacinda Ayers, Assistant Director, and Susan Chin, Analyst-in-Charge, 
managed this assignment. Theresa Lo made significant contributions to 
this report. In addition, Brian Tremblay provided assistance in data 
analysis; Susan Bernstein provided writing assistance; Sheila McCoy and 
Doreen Feldman provided legal assistance; and Jay Smale assisted in 
methodology. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes:  

[1] Some grantees had multiple grant projects. GAO reviewed at least 
one performance report for each of the current grantees we visited. 
However, we generally did not review the performance reports of former 
grantees because their grant projects had ended prior to the 
establishment of the current performance measures in 2004. 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.  

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "Subscribe to Updates."  

Order by Mail or Phone: 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to:  

U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room LM: 
Washington, D.C. 20548:  

To order by Phone: 
Voice: (202) 512-6000: 
TDD: (202) 512-2537: 
Fax: (202) 512-6061:  

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:  

Contact:  

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: [email protected]: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:  

Congressional Relations:  

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, [email protected]: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548:  

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, [email protected]: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

*** End of document. ***