WASHINGTON - The Education Department has begun cracking down on universities that fail to reveal donations and contracts from foreign governments, hoping to present far more scrutiny to funding that has washed to the United States’ increased training establishments from countries typically at odds with American insurance policies but keen to tap the country’s brightest minds.
The division declared this summer months that it was investigating regardless of whether Georgetown, Texas A&M, Cornell and Rutgers universities were fully complying with a federal law that requires colleges to report all gifts and contracts from foreign sources that exceed $250,000. In letters sent to the universities in July, section officials wrote that they were seeking records dating as considerably back as nine years, outlining agreements, communication and fiscal transactions with entities and governments in nations around the world such as China, Qatar, Russia and Saudi Arabia.
Schools were expected this month to turn more than thousands of records that could reveal millions of dollars in overseas aid for campus operations overseas, academic research, and other cultural and academic partnerships.
Department officials have not said that they believe anything is amiss, but in communication with the schools, they have cited “security, academic freedom and other concerns associated with foreign funding.”
“Our biggest concern is transparency,” said Liz Hill, a spokeswoman for the section. “We expect colleges and universities to provide full, accurate and transparent information when reporting international gifts and contracts. Our national security depends on it, and it’s required by law. Our investigations make it clear that the section expects institutions to take their reporting obligations seriously.”
The crackdown comes amid increased scrutiny of foreign influence in recent years, be it Russian meddling in United States elections, Chinese economic espionage or outsider efforts to sway American think tanks.
The Justice Section recently declared that it would escalate its crackdown on illegal international impact operations in the United States, particularly potential violations of the Overseas Agents Registration Act, or FARA, which requires lobbyists and others to disclose any work they do to further the interests of international governments. Last week, the Justice Division declared that federal officers had indicted a researcher at the University of Kansas for working full time for a Chinese university while also being paid through United States government contracts to conduct research.
The Schooling Office has faced pressure in recent months to take a larger role in protecting against undue foreign impact by enforcing laws that require colleges and universities to be extra transparent about their international relationships. Last year, in a Senate Intelligence hearing examining Russian influence in American elections, the F.B.I. director, Christopher A. Wray pointed to some “na?veté on the part of the academic sector” about how vulnerable campuses were to national security and counterintelligence risks posed by China. He acknowledged specific concerns about Confucius Institutes, cultural and language programs that are funded and largely operated by Beijing - and hosted by nearly 100 American campuses and schools.
In February, an investigation by a Senate subcommittee into Confucius Institutes found widespread monetary underreporting by colleges and universities that host them on campuses.
“Foreign government spending on U.S. schools is effectively a black hole,” the report concluded.
The same month, Education Section officials revealed in congressional testimony that fewer than 3 percent of 3,700 greater schooling establishments that receive international funding reported receiving overseas gifts or contracts exceeding $250,000.
The investigations are the latest example of how colleges and universities have found themselves in the cross fire of the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration and American overseas policy. International enrollment has declined, visa delays have increased, and foreign students and staff members have been denied entry. This week, a palestinian student headed to class at Harvard said he was denied entry in to the country after a Customs and Border protection agent demanded to see his phone and objected to the social media activity of his friends. Amid pressure from lawmakers and an escalating trade war with China, a number of colleges - including Texas A&M - have shuttered their Confucius Institutes.
But the most recent charge by the Training Office has rattled those in larger training. The investigations, disclosed in the Federal Register, were the first time in recent history that the department had publicly declared that it had been scrutinizing specific schools. Those notices detailed extensive information - including tax records and wire transfers, communications between professors and overseas governments, and information about overseas campuses - that the section wanted.
The division is also seeking comprehensive records on China and Qatar. The department’s notices repeatedly cite high-profile organizations, such as the Qatar Foundation for Instruction, Science and Community Development, which helps fund American satellite campuses in the country; the Office of Chinese Language Council International, also known as “Hanban,” which runs Confucius Institutes; and Huawei, the largest telecommunications equipment producer in the world, which the Trump administration deems a national security risk, and which Secretary of State Mike pompeo called “an instrument of the Chinese government.”
The Education Division investigations have caused friction between the section and several greater training groups, which have urged it to clarify the rules around an obscure provision, called Section 117, in the Higher Instruction Act. They say that university relationships with foreign entities have become more complex and voluminous since the section was added three decades ago. In the absence of any formal regulation from the division, schools have reported based on their best interpretations of the law, the groups say.
“This is what happens when you pass a law that nobody looks at ever again,” said Terry W. Hartle, senior vice president of the American Council on Instruction, which represents 1,700 college and university presidents and increased education executives.
Seven larger schooling groups argued that it absolutely was “patently unfair to enforce requirements that do not exist in writing.” Certain reporting requirements were vague - such as no matter if the $250,000 threshold is met with an individual gift, or an aggregate amount, and irrespective of whether the definition of an “institution” includes foundations that may route money to the universities, the groups said.
“It’s not like schools are trying to hide something here, they want to do the right thing,” Mr. Hartle said. “They’re now being investigated without any regulatory framework. The Division of Schooling is basically saying, ‘The law means what we say it means when we investigate you.’”
Dory Devlin, a spokeswoman for Rutgers, whose contracts with and gifts from China, Qatar and Russia dating to 2010 are under review, said that it had “been in direct talks with the office, have received clarification on the rules, and we recognize the need to quickly come into compliance with the reporting regulations.”
Meghan Dubyak, a spokeswoman for Georgetown, which was asked to produce records related to its relationships with China, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Russia, said the university had used “a careful, methodical process” to catalog “gifts from or contracts with a overseas source.” She said the university had “worked with the Office of Education to provide responsive information demonstrating that it has reported all required information.”
Since 2012, colleges and universities have reported far more than $10 billion in foreign assistance, according to a database of foreign gifts maintained by the Education and learning Division. In the 2017-18 school year, 91 institutions reported receiving more than $1.3 billion in gifts and contracts from overseas governmental and nongovernmental sources in 105 international locations, with China ranking as the highest donor, according to the division.
But the department said schools at times have clearly omitted documentation. Texas A&M University’s reporting, for instance, should have included Texas A&M University at Qatar, which receives millions in funding from the Qatar foundation.
Several colleges under investigation praised their partnerships with the foundation. Cornell, whose investigation also includes its relationships with China, said that its Qatar campus had “trained and graduated hundreds of young physicians from the Middle East, Asia and many other nations (including the U.S.).”
But last year, the Qatar foundation raised a red flag when it responded to a public records request regarding Texas A&M by suing to protect data on grants and donations, arguing that it had been confidential commercial information “tantamount to trade secrets.”
In a statement, the Qatar foundation said that it sought only to protect specific allocations and payments of contracts and research grants, which is allowable under Texas law, not the details of its activities and projects with institutions. The organization said that its efforts to protect competitive information was never meant “to affect the disclosures that universities are required to make under U.S. law,” and that it has requested a meeting with the Schooling Office to reinforce that position.
The organization said its better education initiative, called Education City, “has made it an important beacon for academic freedom in the region, while supporting Qatar’s vision of long-term economic sustainability,” and “always been conducted in the interests of openness, transparency, and mutual benefit.”
Michael K. Young, the president of Texas A&M, said the university had been transparent and proud of its relationship with the Qatar foundation, which helps fund its Qatar campus and has brought in about $50 million in research funding, which he says is “a vital part of the university.” He said that there was no interference by the government or the foundation, and that students receive a “totally Western schooling just as if they were sitting here in Texas.”
Mr. Young also said the university’s campus was transcending boundaries: Men and women take classes together, and it enrolls a greater percentage of women in engineering program than its Texas program.
“We’re excited and proud of that campus,” Mr. Young said. “It’s wrapped in to the core values of our institution.”