Andy Kim (D-NJ)
Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act
A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the "Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act," focuses on protecting the integrity of Federal funds. It requires the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct an assessment of program areas and administrative practices that pose risks to funds managed by State and local governments. These assessments must identify systemic vulnerabilities, such as those susceptible to waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments. The assessment will also evaluate evidence-based best practices and the effectiveness of various mitigation strategies. Additionally, the Comptroller General will identify ways to improve Federal tools and resources available to State and local governments. Finally, the report will include recommendations for Federal agencies and Congress to improve program areas and administrative processes.
Yes· 3 of 7
- Scored +5
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
The assessment of systemic vulnerabilities and improper payments directly promotes better stewardship of taxpayer funds.
- Scored +4
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The requirement for systematic assessments and reports to Congress enhances transparency of federal fund administration.
- Scored +3
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?
By identifying waste, fraud, and abuse in Federal fund administration, the bill aims to improve fiscal efficiency.
The opposite
- Scored -1
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The mandate for federal assessment of state-administered programs represents a slight increase in federal oversight over state domains.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Oversight of Federal Funds: The bill requires the Comptroller General to identify program areas and practices that are susceptible to waste, fraud, abuse, and improper payments (Section 2(c)(1)). This could help ensure that taxpayer money is used as intended.
-
Identification of Effective Strategies: The assessment will evaluate evidence-based best practices and strategies that have successfully strengthened the integrity of Federal funds (Section 2(c)(2)). This focus on what works can lead to more efficient administration of programs.
-
Improved Administrative Processes: The bill calls for recommendations to improve eligibility determination and enrollment processes to mitigate risks (Section 2(c)(5)). This could lead to more accurate and streamlined systems for people accessing programs.
-
Enhanced Support for Local Governments: The assessment will look at how Federal tools, resources, and technical assistance can be improved to help State and local governments prevent systemic vulnerabilities (Section 2(c)(4)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts are explicitly mentioned in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — The assessment of systemic vulnerabilities and improper payments directly promotes better stewardship of taxpayer funds. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — By identifying waste, fraud, and abuse in Federal fund administration, the bill aims to improve fiscal efficiency. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The bill focuses on mitigating improper payments and waste which can help control unnecessary spending.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The requirement for systematic assessments and reports to Congress enhances transparency of federal fund administration. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill increases federal oversight of state-administered programs through Comptroller General assessments. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The mandate for federal assessment of state-administered programs represents a slight increase in federal oversight over state domains.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Improving eligibility determination and reducing improper payments can ensure more effective program administration for those in need. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Increased fiscal responsibility and reduced waste can indirectly benefit middle-class taxpayers.
- 7/29/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Josh HawleyRepublican · Missouri