GAO says federal agencies still lack reliable ways to measure whether programs work
Federal agencies often cannot answer a basic accountability question: whether taxpayer-funded programs are achieving the results they were created to deliver.
That is the central finding of a Government Accountability Office assessment published and publicly released July 21, 2026. GAO said many federal programs lack clearly defined, measurable goals, relevant outcome data and enough rigorous evaluation to determine whether services are improving people’s lives.
Spending and participation are not the same as results
Agencies commonly report outputs such as how much money a program spends, how many people it serves or how many applications it processes. Those measures can show activity, but they do not necessarily show whether a program improved health, increased safety, helped families recover or solved the problem it was designed to address.
GAO distinguishes ongoing performance management from more rigorous program evaluation. Regular monitoring can provide an early warning that a program is falling short. Impact evaluations can help determine whether the program itself caused a measurable change by comparing results with what would have happened without it.
GAO said that in a 2020 survey, about one-third of federal managers reported having access to robust evaluations to help manage their programs. Without useful goals, reliable data and stronger evaluations, agencies and Congress have less basis for deciding what should be expanded, changed or ended.
A selected review found gaps across three agencies
GAO’s 2026 review of 15 federal programs serving pregnant women, children through age 5 and their families found that 12 had established performance-management processes. Three did not: one program at the Department of Agriculture, one at the Department of Health and Human Services, and one at the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The finding applies to that selected group of programs, not to all federal programs. It does, however, illustrate the broader problem GAO identified: agencies may be collecting information without having a consistent way to connect that information to the outcomes they are expected to achieve.
Why the measurement problem matters to Congress
Weak measurement limits congressional oversight. Lawmakers may know how much a program costs and how many people receive assistance, but have difficulty judging whether the program is delivering value or whether another approach would work better.
It also makes overlap harder to identify. Related programs can serve similar populations or pursue similar goals across different agencies. If those agencies use unclear goals, incomplete data or incompatible measures, comparing performance and streamlining efforts becomes more difficult.
The affected areas include services Americans rely on for health care, public safety and disaster support. GAO’s report does not establish that those programs are ineffective. It says agencies often cannot reliably determine how effective they are.
Implementation gaps extend beyond individual programs
A separate GAO report published June 23, 2026, found that the Office of Management and Budget and four selected agencies had not fully implemented new requirements under the Federal Agency Performance Act of 2024.
GAO said OMB’s guidance did not fully address several statutory requirements for strategic reviews, including requirements involving agency leaders and stakeholders. The Departments of Homeland Security and the Treasury had procedures addressing most, but not all, requirements; the Department of State and the General Services Administration had not developed the required process documents. None of the four selected agencies had fully implemented the new strategic-review requirements.
The review covered selected agencies rather than every federal agency. Together with the July assessment, it points to a broader management challenge: rules can require agencies to set goals and review performance, but the process is less useful when goals are vague, data are incomplete or evaluations are limited.
Fraud risks add another accountability concern
GAO’s fraud-risk report, reissued with revisions Aug. 7, provides related context. The broader category of federally funded, state-administered programs received an estimated $1.2 trillion in fiscal 2025. GAO’s review of 20 programs representing about $1.1 trillion in federal obligations found that 15 lacked documented evidence consistent with identifying fraud risks and assessing their likelihood to prioritize action.
That finding does not mean fraud occurred in all 15 programs. It means GAO did not find documented evidence of the specified risk-assessment work for those programs. The report reinforces why documentation, data and regular reviews matter when public money moves through complex federal and state systems.
What to watch next
The next accountability test is whether agencies act on GAO’s recommendations, improve performance-review guidance and conduct stronger evaluations. GAO recommended that OMB revise its guidance and that the selected agencies improve their strategic-review documentation; the recommendations remained open when GAO published its report.
Readers should also watch whether Congress uses clearer outcome information when it reviews funding for health care, food assistance, public safety and disaster programs.
For taxpayers, the practical issue is straightforward: a program can show that money was spent and people were served while still leaving unanswered whether the intended public benefit was achieved.
Sources
- GAO: Federal Programs — Assessing and Improving Effectiveness
- Federal News Network: The government needs to do more to measure agency performance
Look for updates to this story
Discover more from Interactive News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.