Government Audit and Accountability of Federally Funded State-Administered Programs Act

Summary of HR 8107 (119th Congress)

Title

To require the establishment of a list identifying program areas and administrative practices presenting the greatest risk to the integrity of Federal funds administered by States and local governments.

Purpose and intent

• The bill aims to improve the integrity and oversight of federal funds that are administered by state and local governments.
• It would require the establishment of a formal list that identifies program areas and administrative practices deemed to present the greatest risk to the integrity of those federal funds.
• By identifying high-risk areas, the bill seeks to enhance prevention, detection, and mitigation of potential losses, misuse, or fraud in federal funding streams.

Key provisions and changes (highlights)

• Establishment of a List:
  • Mandates the creation of a list that catalogs program areas and administrative practices considered to pose the greatest risk to federal fund integrity when administered by states and localities.
• Scope of the List:
  • Likely to cover programs funded, administered, or overseen at the state and local level with federal dollars (e.g., grants, entitlements, stimulus or recovery funds, and other federal-aid programs).
• Risk Identification Criteria:
  • Requires criteria or methodology to assess and rank risk across program areas and administrative practices.
  • Potentially includes factors such as susceptibility to improper payments, fraud, waste, noncompliance with federal requirements, weak internal controls, or inadequate monitoring.
• Oversight and Implementation:
  • Provisions to designate responsible federal agency(ies) or a specific office to oversee the list’s development, update process, and dissemination.
  • May require periodic updates and public disclosure to ensure transparency.
• Use of the List:
  • The list would inform federal oversight, audit planning, risk-based monitoring, and perhaps guidance or compliance resources for states and local governments.
  • Could affect allocation of technical assistance, training, or enforcement focus on higher-risk areas.

Who would be affected

• Federal agencies that administer or oversee funding to state and local governments.
• State, territorial, and local government entities that receive or administer federal funds.
• Auditors and inspectors general responsible for evaluating compliance and program integrity.
• Potentially, entities applying for or managing federal grants or funds in the identified high-risk areas.

Procedural and timeline aspects

• Introduction and referral:
  • Introduced in the House and referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform on March 26, 2026.
• Committee action:
  • Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held on April 29, 2026, indicating consideration, potential amendments, and a reported or forwarded version to the full House.
• Sponsorship:
  • Co-sponsors include Rep. Tim Burchett and Rep. Ro Khanna, suggesting bipartisan interest.
• Future steps:
  • If approved by the committee, the bill would move to the full House for debate and a vote, and thereafter to the Senate (unless process changes or reconciliation is used).

Practical implications

• Increased focus on risk-based oversight of federal funds at subnational levels.
• Potential for enhanced training, guidance, and monitoring resources directed at high-risk program areas and administrative practices.
• May lead to policy changes in how federal funds are allocated, tracked, and audited to reduce improper payments and noncompliance.

Note: This summary reflects the bill’s stated objective and provisions as described in the available action history and title. If the bill’s text becomes available, additional details (e.g., exact criteria, reporting deadlines, funding implications, and enforcement mechanisms) could refine the analysis.