Comptroller Stringer Audit: DOE’s Inadequate Controls Over Remote Devices Increased Risk of Learning Loss, Inequitable Distribution and Waste

 

DOE did not ensure that students received only one DOE remote learning device during COVID-19 pandemic and lacked procedures to ensure that its criteria for distributing and recalling remote learning devices are applied consistently across DOE’s 1,800 schools

DOE’s distribution processes resulted in the erroneous shipment of more than one remote learning device to at least 3,045 students

16,451 requests students made in 2020 for remote learning devices remained under review or unresolved as of March 25, 2021

 Today, New York City Comptroller Scott M. Stringer released an audit that revealed the Department of Education (DOE)’s inadequate controls over the distribution of remote learning devices amid the COVID-19 pandemic could have contributed to their inequitable distribution and increased the risk of waste. When DOE schools were forced to transition to remote learning due to the pandemic, DOE’s Division of Instructional and Information Technology (DIIT) was tasked with procuring, preparing, and distributing internet-enabled iPads to hundreds of thousands of students. Comptroller Stringer’s audit found that DOE lacked procedures to ensure that its criteria for distributing and recalling remote learning devices were applied consistently across DOE’s 1,800 schools.

From the 357,000 remote learning devices DOE purchased in April and June 2020, DOE erroneously shipped more than one device to at least 3,045 students. As of April 2021, DOE was still reconciling its data and this number could potentially increase. Meanwhile, 16,451 requests DOE received in 2020 from students seeking remote learning devices remained under review or unresolved as recently as March 25, 2021.

“For years, lower-income children and families have struggled without reliable connectivity, and the severe impacts of this digital divide were only exacerbated when the COVID-19 pandemic hit,” said Comptroller Stringer. “The DOE had a responsibility to provide remote learning devices to hundreds of thousands of students, but our audit shows the agency did not have consistent protocols in place to ensure that devices were distributed when they were needed most. Even one child falling behind in schoolwork because of these errors is unacceptable. The DOE must promptly correct the deficiencies and implement our recommendations to make sure remote learning devices are distributed equitably and that every student who needs a device receives one.”

Comptroller Stringer’s investigation uncovered the following findings:

• DOE does not centrally track devices schools issued from their in-house inventories to help ensure that DIIT does not issue additional devices to students who already received them from their schools.
• DOE has not formalized procedures for the tracking and distribution of devices, which increased the risk that the criteria for device request validation, device distribution, and device recall would not be understood and applied on a consistent basis throughout DOE, including at the numerous individual schools throughout the City that, as of the 2020-2021 school year, review and validate students’ requests.
• DOE does not perform timely reviews of device-related data. DOE does not have an ongoing process for tracking and reconciling requests for devices and devices that have been distributed. Illustrating this problem, as of March 25, 2021, 19,425 requests from students were still “under review” and “unresolved.” In fact, 16,451 of these requests dated back to 2020, some as early as March 18, 2020. DOE did not explain why these requests remained “under review” or “unresolved” for such an extended period of time.
• Deficiencies exist in DOE’s management of control numbers, specifically, request IDs from DOE’s request data and asset tag numbers assigned to iPads were not sequential.

To address these issues, Comptroller Stringer recommended the following actions:

1. DOE should ensure that a central tracking system to account for all devices issued to students is established, regardless of whether they are issued by DIIT or by schools from their in-house inventories.
2. DOE should develop and timely disseminate detailed written policies and procedures governing the agency’s management of validating student requests for a device, distributing and tracking those devices, and recalling those devices, including specific return deadlines.
3. DOE should ensure that its device request data is reconciled to the device distribution data to provide an accurate account for all requests made and for the students who received devices.
4. DOE should ensure that reports are generated from its device request data and reviewed timely so that anomalies in the data are quickly identified and addressed, and that request dispositions are properly classified.
5. DOE should ensure that the 19,425 requests that are still “under review” and “unresolved” are investigated to determine whether these students already received devices.
6. DOE should ensure that it immediately provides devices to the students whose requests are “under review” and “unresolved” if it determines any eligible students are still awaiting a device.
7. DOE should ensure that Request IDs are issued in sequential order and tracked, and that any gaps in these numbers are investigated in a timely manner and the reasons for them adequately documented.
8. DOE should modify its policy to ensure that asset tag numbers are issued in sequential order and tracked, and that going forward, any gaps in these numbers are investigated in a timely manner and the reasons for them adequately documented.
9. DOE should take steps to ensure that the remaining devices that were shipped to students in error are returned and put back into inventory to be distributed if needed.
10. DOE should take appropriate action where devices have not been returned, including referring matters to the agency’s investigative units or DOE’s Special Commissioner for Investigation when warranted.

In response, DOE agreed with 8 of the audit’s 10 recommendations. However, for two of these recommendations (#3 and #4), officials’ assertion that the agency was already in compliance is contradicted by the audit findings. Additionally, DOE disagreed with the audit’s recommendations that it ensure that Request IDs and asset tag numbers are issued in sequential order and tracked (#7 and #8).

To read Comptroller Stringer’s investigation on the Department of Education’s controls over the distribution of remote learning devices, click here.