The U.S. Department of Education isn’t keeping a close eye on how states are tracking chronic absenteeism, suggesting a pattern of lax oversight that may put billions in federal funds at risk of waste, fraud, and abuse, according to a report released Sept. 23 by the Government Accountability Office, Congress’ investigative arm.
The problem appears tied at least in part to the Education Department’s decision this year to suspend its regular, comprehensive examinations of how states are implementing the Every Student Succeeds Act, the nation’s main federal K-12 law through which the federal government disburses billions of dollars for schools, the GAO concludes.
And as schools continue to struggle with elevated chronic absenteeism, the information states are collecting on student absences is potentially unreliable, and the statistics can mean different things depending on the state, the GAO says.
The Education Department’s decision to suspend its previous, deeper state oversight system—called consolidated monitoring—has “broad oversight implications that extend beyond chronic absenteeism,” the GAO writes.
Since the department isn’t keeping an eye on states’ compliance with ESSA’s fiscal requirements, “there is higher risk that these federal funds ... could be subject to undetected fraud, waste, or abuse,” the report says.
The department disagreed with most of the report’s conclusions, including the claims of insufficient ESSA oversight, according to a letter from Kirsten Baesler, the assistant secretary of elementary and secondary education, included in the report.
Though the report focuses on one aspect of the department’s monitoring, the GAO did not detail dozens of other instances of monitoring the department has engaged in over the past seven years, Baesler said.
The report also does not mention another big, recent change to federal K-12 programs: namely, that the Trump administration has shifted administration of Title I and other key K-12 programs to the U.S. Department of Labor.
But it does detail significant staff reductions in the Education Department divisions responsible for ESSA oversight and data collection.
States incorporate chronic absenteeism into federal accountability systems
Under ESSA—which governs more than $25 billion in federal K-12 funding, including Title I grants for educating children from low-income households—states must gauge and report school performance by examining test scores, English-language proficiency, and an indicator of their choosing. More than half of states, 36, have opted to incorporate chronic absenteeism data into their ESSA accountability systems.
And even states that don’t measure chronic absenteeism as an explicit part of their systems for rating and identifying low-performing schools must report on the problem. For instance, states must provide information about schools’ chronic absenteeism rates on public report cards.
About a quarter of students have been chronically absent in recent years, generally meaning they’ve missed at least 10% of school days, reports the GAO, which sent its findings to lawmakers overseeing education spending. That puts children at significant risk of falling behind academically, as department officials themselves have noted.
“High rates of chronic absenteeism can make it difficult for students and schools to close achievement gaps,” the GAO report says. “It can also reduce the impact of the federal government’s multibillion-dollar investment in K-12 education, as children cannot benefit from classroom instruction when they are not in school.”
In an audit, the GAO found that schools around the country—especially those serving children only part of the school day, like career-and-technical education centers, and low-performing schools—reported “implausible” rates of chronic absenteeism. Some schools reported attendance rates above 100 percent.
The watchdog also notes that, even before the department suspended its comprehensive state monitoring, more than half of states—32—hadn’t undergone a comprehensive review of their ESSA implementation since 2019.
There aren’t hard-and-fast requirements in ESSA around how the department monitors states, the GAO says.
States calculate chronic absenteeism differently
The watchdog agency also flagged significant variability in how states calculate chronic absenteeism rates, meaning there’s no consistent, national measure on the trend.
The department had asked states to move to a more uniform system in 2024 under the Biden administration. But that effort was halted under the Trump administration, which slashed the office of elementary and secondary education’s workforce by 43%. The Institute of Education Sciences—responsible for data collection—lost 85% of its employees.
The GAO recommends that Congress enact clearer state monitoring requirements. And the watchdog suggests the Education Department “promptly” resume its consolidated monitoring process. It also recommends the department require states to report chronic absenteeism rates using a more uniform, accurate method and provide guidance on how to do so.
In its response to the GAO’s findings, the department countered that suspending consolidated monitoring doesn’t mean that no one is looking at state ESSA implementation. The department conducted “more than 100” oversight and monitoring activities from 2019 to 2025, the agency said. Officials said they will roll out a new monitoring plan this fall.
The department also said the variance in chronic absenteeism rates is “a known limitation” of the data and did not agree to require states to adopt a more uniform approach.
Still, the agency promised to publish nonbinding guidance for states on calculating absenteeism rates.
“Accurate and useful data is a part of understanding and addressing the challenge of ensuring students are present at school and receive a quality education,” Baesler wrote.
