Summary
- The Trump administration withheld Head Start funds illegally, violating the Impoundment Control Act.
- HHS slowed grant disbursements in early 2025 compared to 2024 levels.
- HHS did not cooperate with GAO’s information requests.
- Proposed 2026 budget seeks to eliminate Head Start funding.
- GAO and Congress criticize the withholding as harming low-income children’s programs.
The Children and Families Services Programs of the Department of Health and Human Services were found to have violated the 1974 Impoundment Control Act (ICA) "by withholding funds from expenditure" intended for early childhood development programs by the Government Accountability Office.
According to GAO, although Congress approved monies for Head Start for fiscal year 2025,
"HHS significantly reduced the rate of disbursement of funds for Head Start grant programs, as compared to amounts disbursed in the same time period in FY 2024"
between January 20 and April 15 of this year.
The watchdog claimed that although it sought factual information regarding the issue and the legal opinions of the department from the federal health department, which has been led by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. since mid-February,
"HHS has not transmitted the requested information."
"Given the absence of information from HHS, we have based this letter upon publicly available evidence,"
GAO said in its decision published Wednesday.
"Because that evidence indicates that HHS withheld appropriated funds from expenditure, and because the burden to justify such withholdings rests with HHS and the executive branch, we conclude that HHS violated the ICA by withholding funds from expenditure."
Through grant recipients, Head Start provides nutritional, health, and educational services to low-income children in all 50 states. The purpose of the 1974 statute was to safeguard the separation of powers by prohibiting the executive branch from withholding funds that Congress had appropriated.
According to GAO, it often looks for signs that funds were correctly withheld by examining obligational data and distribution schedules from an allocation. Despite GAO's statutory power to obtain such data, the Trump administration allegedly took it down from its public websites. The legislative office further alleged that when GAO asked for the information, it was not given.
A request for comment from HHS was not immediately answered.
The GAO, which is part of the legislative branch rather than the executive branch, was established in 1921 to assist Congress in monitoring the use of public funds and managing the nation's mounting debt following World War I.
In order to legally revoke previously approved funding, Congress just passed a rescissions package worth about $9 billion. This is the proper way to reverse funding that Congress has authorized.
What are potential future legal consequences for the Trump administration over this funding issue (future implications)?
Similar to past instances where the Trump administration withheld funds (e.g., Ukraine aid) or attempted to dismantle agencies, this action is likely to trigger additional lawsuits from affected NGOs, advocacy groups, and states . These lawsuits would seek to compel the administration to release the funds, arguing violations of the Impoundment Control Act and other federal statutes .
The outcome of such lawsuits could result in court orders requiring the release of funds and potentially even finding specific officials in contempt if they continue to defy judicial directives.
While the GAO report is a finding by an independent watchdog, Congress can use this as a basis for further oversight hearings, investigations, and potentially new legislation aimed at strengthening anti-impoundment laws or imposing clearer penalties for their violation.