Watchdog finds scant records of DOGE ethics training, financial disclosures

Only a fraction of the 206 DOGE personnel identified by a congressional watchdog had paper trails associated with ethics and records management training and financial disclosures, a congressional watchdog reported Wednesday.

The findings came as part of a Government Accountability Office report focused on identifying the employment statuses and administrative activities of personnel while a part of the notorious, and now mostly defunct, Department of Government Efficiency. 

According to the report, GAO obtained relevant training and disclosure records for just 64 of the DOGE personnel it identified. Of that number, 49 completed ethics training, 18 completed records management training, and 38 submitted financial disclosures. 

It also identified that 27 DOGE officials were “special government employees,” which means they could hold employment elsewhere while working for the federal government temporarily. GAO noted that type of designation creates difficult ethics issues.

But GAO reported difficulty finding even that level of information as a result of lack of responsiveness from multiple federal entities and limited information it received, the report revealed.

While the Executive Office of the President told the watchdog that the DOGE personnel received the same training on ethics and records management as other personnel in that office, it did not respond to GAO’s request for access to those records or financial disclosures. Ten executive branch agencies did not respond to GAO’s inquiries in a timely manner or at all, the report said. EOP and the Office of Personnel Management didn’t respond to the watchdog’s requests to verify accuracy of the report.

As a result, GAO qualified that the 206 personnel it was able to identify don’t represent all of the individuals who advanced the DOGE in the first year of the second Trump administration — roughly the time period it was reviewing. Lack of responsiveness also contributed to the lack of certainty about how many total DOGE personnel were required under statute to complete the administrative tasks in question in the first place. While federal employees are generally required to complete those training and disclosures, there are exceptions. 

DOGE confusion

Additionally, the report makes note that while the DOGE temporary organization officially terminated its work July 4 — in line with its original mandate from President Donald Trump — the U.S. DOGE Service that it existed within is still kicking.

“Since the EO does not call for the termination of the broader USDS entity, it is possible that USDS and personnel at federal agencies could continue to do work that advances some of these initiatives after the temporary organization’s termination,” GAO said in its note to the members of Congress that requested the report. 

In April, a U.S. DOGE Service official told FedScoop it was adding to its ranks and was focused on driving technology strategies within federal agencies.

However, the Office of Government Ethics, which oversees ethics work in the executive branch, pointed to that sunset date as a reason it doesn’t plan to review the activities of the DOGE. In a letter included in the report, the ethics office told GAO that it can’t review a program that doesn’t exist. It called the characterization that it has no plans to review the organization “misleading.” 

Per the report, OGE told the watchdog it wasn’t sure who was responsible for ethics management with the Executive Office of the President, but that confusion wasn’t unusual after an administration change or reorganization, and it can take time to fill positions. 

While OGE does review agency ethics programs every three to four years, the organization told GAO that it’s had difficulty doing so for programs within the Executive Office of the President in multiple prior administrations because officials claim those components are not “agencies.”

Much of DOGE’s ability to operate free of oversight stems from its home in the White House. For example, the administration has claimed DOGE’s records aren’t subject to public records laws. Adding to the confusion is the lack of clarity over the difference between the temporary organization that was DOGE and the USDS — itself a renamed version of the tech-focused U.S. Digital Service that predates the Trump administration. 

Response issues

The lack of response from multiple federal entities also comes as GAO is reportedly encountering issues with some agencies. 

NOTUS reported in June that GAO officials cited issues with several uncooperative agencies during an internal staff meeting. GAO also recently disclosed that OPM was unresponsive to another recent report on personnel reductions at the agency. At the time, GAO told FedScoop the unresponsiveness was “unusual” and the decision to report it was a “rare step.” 

When asked about recent responsiveness to GAO inquiries, Sarah Kaczmarek, managing director of GAO’s office of public affairs, told FedScoop that the “vast majority of agencies” are cooperating with the watchdog. 

“GAO is committed to fulfilling our statutory responsibilities on behalf of Congress, but timely cooperation from federal agencies is essential to ensuring Congress has the information it needs to conduct effective oversight,” Kaczmarek said in a written statement.