Senators warn moving critical programs to agencies with no education policy experience could delay funding, increase administrative burden, raise program costs
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a former chair and senior member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), joined Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, and Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Ranking Member of the HELP committee, in sending a letter to Acting Comptroller General of the United States, Orice Williams Brown, urging the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) to open an investigation into the Department of Education’s (ED) transfer of grant programs to agencies with no expertise in education policy, such as the Department of Labor—a key step in the Trump administration’s efforts to illegally dismantle and eventually abolish ED.
“We are deeply concerned that the administration’s decisions to (transfer) grant programs in this manner delayed crucial funding that millions of students and schools rely on, created administrative inefficiencies, increased the cost of program administration, and compromised the quality of technical assistance provided to states and grantees,” wrote the senators.
In May 2025, the Trump administration formalized an interagency agreement (IAA) through which it moved the day-to-day management of career and technical education and adult education grant programs, including Perkins V and AEFLA, from ED to DOL. Perkins V grants annually provide over $1.4 billion in funding for career and technical education programs for about 11 million students around the country. AEFLA provides over $700 million in annual funding for adult education opportunities, most often for people without a high school degree or who are English language learners. In 2024, AEFLA served about 1.3 million adult students.
“These programs are a critical pathway to the middle class and can play a key role in reducing poverty and enabling employment,” the Senators continued.
ED is reportedly paying DOL around $1 million to cover the cost of administering these programs during FY25 and FY26. Public reporting suggests that the transfer of these programs has been deeply flawed, leading to weeks-long delays in grant disbursements and harming students and schools.
“The reports raise questions about whether the transfer has actually reduced alleged ‘duplication of effort,’ or just created inefficiency,” said the Senators on the need for GAO investigation into the review the transition of adult education programs to the Department of Labor.
In November 2025, ED announced six additional IAAs, pointing to the May IAA as a template for their work to dismantle the Department. These IAAs transferred significant responsibilities for grant administration for dozens of programs for early childhood, elementary, secondary, and postsecondary education out of ED.
The lawmakers asked GAO to investigate these IAAs — and any future IAAs — and the agreements’ impacts on program costs, timely access to funding, access to services, and quality of technical assistance for grantees.
The full letter is available HEREand below:
Dear Acting Comptroller General Brown:
We write to request a comprehensive investigation into the impacts of the Trump administration’s interagency agreement (IAA) transferring significant responsibilities for career and technical education (CTE) and adult education grant administration from the Department of Education (ED) to the Department of Labor (DOL) as part of its stated efforts to dismantle ED. We further request that your agency investigate the planning, implementation, and impact of the six additional IAAs announced on November 18, 2025, related to transferring significant responsibilities for grant administration for dozens of programs for early childhood, elementary, secondary, and postsecondary education out of ED, and any subsequent IAAs, as they are implemented.
We are deeply concerned that the administration’s decisions to implement CTE and adult education grant programs in this manner delayed crucial funding that millions of students and schools rely on, created administrative inefficiencies, increased the cost of program administration, and compromised the quality of technical assistance provided to states and grantees.
CTE programs provide students with academic, technical, and employability skills and prepare them for postsecondary learning opportunities or work. This makes CTE a critical pathway to the middle class, especially for students facing socioeconomic barriers to well-paying jobs, which helps reduce income inequality. States use federal funding for CTE programs to close racial and gender equity gaps within CTE. Congress unambiguously authorized and appropriates funding for CTE to ED. In 2018, Congress reauthorized the Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act (Perkins V). By requiring that federally funded CTE programs integrate both academic and technical skills, the passage of Perkins V reaffirmed the importance of integrating career and technical education into the education system and our nation’s public schools, not purely viewing these programs as job training. Congress appropriated over $1.4 billion in Perkins V grant funding to ED for Fiscal Year 2026; this funding is critical to the education of the roughly 11 million students who participate in CTE programs around the country.
Adult education programs provide adults—often, those without a high school degree or who are English language learners—with foundational literacy, math, and problem-solving skills. In addition to expanding access to affordable education, these programs are a critical pathway to the middle class and can play a key role in reducing poverty and enabling employment. Congress annually appropriates funding to ED to support adult education programs under the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA), providing over $700 million in funding in 2026. In 2024, AEFLA served 1.3 million adult students.
ED’s Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education (OCTAE) is responsible for administering grant programs under Perkins V and AEFLA. Specifically, ED is responsible for allocating Perkins V and AEFLA funds to states, and states in turn distribute funds to local CTE and adult education program providers.
However, in May 2025, ED and DOL secretly signed an IAA under which DOL is to provide day-to-day administration of ED’s Perkins V and AEFLA programs. This was the first in a series of unprecedented IAAs through which the Trump administration has attempted to transfer ED’s statutory requirements to other agencies, with the political goal of illegally dismantling and eventually abolishing the Department. The Trump administration framed the OCTAE IAA as a measure to improve efficiency, reduce “duplication of effort,” and improve the quality of program administration. But subsequent media reports document that the transition of OCTAE’s grant administration from ED to DOL has faced significant challenges—including technical problems, increased bureaucracy, and communication lapses. According to one report, many of these challenges have been linked to the transition from ED’s unified grants management system to DOL’s setup, in which two separate systems are used to administer grants. That same report also suggested that the launch of money-transfer processes for CTE programs was delayed by weeks. Reporting also indicates that ED is paying DOL around $1 million to cover the cost of DOL administering these programs during FY25 and FY26. Separately, reporting suggests that ED’s November 2025 IAA moving other programs to DOL has slowed work due to IT issues and logistical challenges.
These reports raise concerns that the transfer of adult education and CTE program funding to DOL has resulted in administrative failures and has imposed barriers to states’ timely access to Perkins V and AEFLA grants. Furthermore, the reports raise questions about whether the transfer has actually reduced alleged “duplication of effort,” or just created inefficiency. Given these concerns, we request that GAO review the transition of the administration of ED’s Perkins V and AEFLA programs to DOL. Additionally, as ED’s later-announced IAAs from November 2025 are implemented, we also request that GAO investigate the extent to which those IAAs create inefficiencies or compromise grantees’ timely access to funding; undermine the quality, scope, and timeliness of technical assistance and support provided to grantees; jeopardize services for students; impose administrative burdens on state or local educational agencies; weaken federal support to protect the rights of students, children, youth, and families under federal education laws; and affect other indicators of program integrity and quality.
In its work investigating the OCTAE and other IAAs, we ask that GAO consider the following questions and issues, as applicable:
- How much did the OCTAE IAA cost ED and DOL to implement in fiscal years 2025 and 2026?
- To what extent did states face challenges in accessing Perkins V and AEFLA grants? To what extent are local Perkins or AEFLA grantees facing challenges in accessing federal Perkins or AEFLA funds? What steps have ED and DOL taken to identify and address these challenges, and how much did any such steps cost?
- To what extent did ED and DOL develop and implement comprehensive plans for transitioning Perkins V and AEFLA grant administration to DOL’s payment system? To what extent did any delays or inefficiencies in such plans affect states’ access to Perkins V grants?
- To what extent has DOL’s payment system failed to meet user needs for administering Perkins V and AEFLA grants since the OCTAE IAA was implemented? If significant failures occurred, what steps did ED and DOL take to correct such failures, and how much did those steps cost?
- What issues were identified as part of testing DOL’s payment system for use with Perkins V and AEFLA grant administration?
- What system issues remain unresolved, and does DOL have plans to address them? How have any such issues affected states and grantees? Has DOL made progress on implementing such plans?
- Please identify any deficiencies/gaps between DOL’s payment system and the G-5 system that ED used to administer this program, and if possible, provide information about whether administering this program through DOL has been more costly, time-consuming, or resource-intensive.
- Has the DOL transfer increased or decreased government efficiency? How has the cost of administering CTE and adult education programs changed since the OCTAE IAA was implemented?
- Prior to the OCTAE IAA’s implementation, to what extent was ED’s CTE and adult education grant administration and technical assistance duplicative of DOL’s responsibilities, as the Trump administration alleges?
- To what extent did the quality and availability of technical assistance provided to states and local grantees change due to the OCTAE IAA? What gaps are grantees still reporting in the provision of technical assistance?
- How has the OCTAE IAA changed reporting processes for grantees under the Consolidated Annual Reports (CARs)?
- Please identify any major statutory or regulatory responsibilities delegated to ED that are not being met due to shifts in responsibilities under the IAA, including reviewing and approving changes to state plans; monitoring state and local compliance with statutory requirements, including accountability and improvement requirements; and meeting all reporting requirements under federal law.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
###
