Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, a member of the House education committee, filed three articles of impeachment against McMahon, noting the secretary鈥檚 鈥渨illful intent to unilaterally dismantle and eliminate the Department of Education.鈥�

Bonamici a week ago, prompting a swift response from McMahon defending her track record.

鈥淚t speaks volumes that House Democrats think an impeachable offense is working to improve student outcomes and reduce the federal bureaucracy,鈥� she .

The resolution accuses McMahon of compromising the ability of the department to fulfill its duties. That鈥檚 also the conclusion that the department鈥檚 Inspector General reached in released Wednesday detailing how the administration has slashed the agency鈥檚 staff by 40% and canceled billions of dollars in grants and contracts. 

McMahon has been forced to backtrack. The department currently has several job openings posted, including and .

Democrats have introduced articles of impeachment against multiple members of President Donald Trump鈥檚 cabinet, including Health and Human Services Secretary and Defense Secretary . But historically the attempts have rarely succeeded. Two years ago, the House impeached Biden Homeland Security for what members said was a failure to stop migrants from crossing the border, but the Senate dismissed the two articles against him.  Before him, the last cabinet member to be impeached was William W. Belknap, secretary of war under President Ulysses S. Grant, on , in 1876. 

Critics of Betsy DeVos, Trump鈥檚 first education secretary, called for her to and some groups advocating impeachment. But lawmakers never took formal steps to do so. A federal judge, however, held her in 2019 and fined her $100,000 when she continued student debt collections in violation of a court order. The department .

While some Republicans have also been critical of McMahon, Rep. Tim Walberg, the Michigan Republican who chairs the education committee, called the action 鈥減olitical theater.鈥�

鈥淪ecretary McMahon is doing exactly what voters elected President Trump to do: rein in a bloated bureaucracy and put students, parents, and taxpayers first,鈥� he said in a statement.

The effort is also largely 鈥渟ymbolic鈥� and unlikely to succeed, said Jeffrey Henig, a professor emeritus at Teachers College, Columbia University. 

鈥淪ymbolism can be important, and a case can be made for using this as a way to draw attention to the dismantling of the department,鈥� he said.

The resolution says McMahon has 鈥渄ecimated鈥� the agency and 鈥渃reated a culture of fear and chaos鈥� that has harmed education programs.

Specifically, the articles of impeachment are:

1. Willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law

The text cites McMahon鈥檚 actions to transfer responsibilities, which under law rest with the Education Department, to other agencies. Just last week, she announced that the office overseeing special education would move to the Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of Civil Rights would transfer to the Justice Department.

2. False statements before Congress

The resolution accuses McMahon of lying to Congress during her confirmation hearing that she would follow the law in disbursing education funds appropriated by Congress. Instead, the text reads, she has defended the cancellation of several research contracts and discontinued grants for programs like community schools.

3. Breach of public trust

Again focusing on funding, the resolution states that the administration held up payments for services like migrant education and afterschool care and put 鈥渃ritical鈥� K-12 programs at risk.

Bonamici said parents, especially those of students with disabilities are “distraught” over splitting up the department. “They are asking us to take action to stop these illegal transfers,” she said. “To them I say, ‘We hear you.’ “

Michael Petrilli, president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative think tank, suggested McMahon鈥檚 actions aren鈥檛 grounds for impeachment.

鈥淭he race to the bottom continues, in this case regarding the definition of 鈥榟igh crimes and misdemeanors,鈥� ” he said. 鈥淭his is just politics, but I can appreciate that Congressional Democrats don’t feel like they have any other recourse right now.鈥� 

When she negotiates with school officials, she often leans on a from the federal government that such 鈥渋nformal removals鈥� 鈥� like repeatedly asking a parent to pick up their child early 鈥� could violate a student鈥檚 rights. 

鈥淭hey鈥檙e denying them access to education,鈥� she said. Parents need that guidance, she added, 鈥渂ecause most families can鈥檛 afford attorneys and years of litigation.鈥�

That Biden-era document was a of the two offices within the U.S. Department of Education that oversee special education and civil rights and drew attention to that had long gone under the radar. But with Secretary Linda McMahon鈥檚 announcement last week that staff in those offices will be sent to separate agencies 鈥� special education to the Department of Health and Human Services and the Office for Civil Rights to the Department of Justice 鈥� educators and attorneys worry the split will lead to crossed wires for students with disabilities. 

鈥淲hen school districts have to navigate rules from separate federal departments, it will make it even more challenging to manage a single student’s behavior,鈥� said Jessica Saum, a special education administrator in Arkansas鈥� Cabot Public Schools, north of Little Rock. Special education programs and civil rights enforcement 鈥渁re completely intertwined in practice. I do not see how schools and districts can cleanly separate a student’s behavioral needs from their civil rights.鈥�

Sen. Bill Cassidy, the Louisiana Republican who chairs the education committee, has promised to schedule a vote next month to from moving special education to HHS. Parents say they鈥檙e concerned that their children鈥檚 disabilities would be viewed from a medical perspective. 

鈥淚 don’t want my son to be fixed. I want him to be educated,鈥� said Courtney Hansen, a Colorado mom whose son has Down Syndrome. Like Frohling, she was among the hundreds of parents and advocates who joined a with department staff to voice their opinions on the administration鈥檚 plans to relocate oversight of special education. A medical model, Hansen said, is 鈥渨hat the disability rights movement has been trying to get away from for the past 50 years.鈥�

But Cassidy, who has been critical of HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., still wouldn鈥檛 keep special education and civil rights in the same agency. He thinks the Department of Labor is a better home for special education.  

In addition to the guidance on discipline, the department鈥檚 special education officials worked with OCR in 2016 on a clarifying that students with ADHD were eligible for services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

Until then, those students were often 鈥渙verlooked because they were bright, quiet, passing classes or not creating obvious discipline problems,鈥� said Jon Thomas, a Fairfax, Virginia, counselor who works with students who have ADHD. The condition, he said, 鈥渞arely shows up as one clean problem. It’s a kid who’s behind in reading, getting written up for impulsivity, leaning on a parent to hold the homework together, and missing instruction because nobody connected the dots. Split the agencies, and you split that dot-connecting job in half.鈥�

鈥楽harper teeth鈥�

The with HHS and DOJ were the latest attempts by the Trump administration to break up and ultimately phase out the Education Department. The DOJ would also handle complaints related to . In her about the move, McMahon said the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services and the Office for Civil Rights will 鈥渃ontinue to partner together.鈥� She promised that the move would 鈥渂reak down the bureaucratic barriers and strengthen the coordination of resources.鈥�

Some advocates agree with her. Marilyn Muller, a whose daughter has dyslexia, is 鈥渃autiously optimistic鈥� that moving oversight of special education and civil rights out of the Education Department would 鈥渇inally deliver real accountability,鈥� she . 鈥淭oo many families have waited years for states and local districts to follow the law.鈥�

The Department of Justice, she wrote, has 鈥渟harper teeth.鈥� 

But that鈥檚 what some parents and advocates worry about. Relationships with district officials over special education services are already adversarial. In the District of Columbia Public Schools, an OCR investigation recently concluded that parents were often forced to sue to get services for their children. Putting DOJ, the federal government鈥檚 primary law enforcement agency, in charge could make the process even less collaborative, Hansen said.

Others say it鈥檚 unlikely that the DOJ will make progress on a backlog of OCR complaints when it, too, has experienced . 

鈥淭here has already been a dramatic drop in the number of cases OCR is taking and resolving,鈥� particularly disability complaints, said Matt Cohen, a Chicago-based civil rights attorney who specializes in cases involving students with disabilities. 鈥淎s would be true when any organization is uncoupled, collaboration, coordination and consistency will be far more difficult.鈥�  

Among the complaints OCR is acting on, officials that it鈥檚 investigating the New Home Independent School District in Texas, south of Lubbock, for canceling a life skills class for students with disabilities. In May, it opened an investigation into the for its plans to move some services for students with disabilities to a central location this fall rather than keep them in general education classrooms. 

OCR also spent a year probing the D.C. Public Schools鈥� special education system, but a from the Government Accountability Office, a watchdog agency, found that OCR dismissed 90% of the 7,000 cases it says it resolved between March and September last year.

OCR鈥檚 most shows it received 22,687 complaints in fiscal year 2024, with more than 8,400 focusing on disabilities. But the public has no way to know how many complaints OCR, under McMahon鈥檚 leadership, is currently investigating because the website with that information since the Trump administration took office. 

鈥楥hange does need to happen鈥�

Even before staff departures, the DOJ鈥檚 civil rights division 鈥渢raditionally handled a much lower volume of cases,鈥� said Johnathan Smith, managing director of education and federal strategic advocacy at the National Center for Youth Law. He previously served as a deputy assistant attorney in that division. 鈥淚t is not clear that there is the infrastructure to meaningfully handle such a high volume of complaints.鈥�

Rob Harris, a Colorado father filed several complaints with OCR during the first Trump and Biden administrations, because his daughter, who is blind, wasn鈥檛 receiving services written into her individualized education program, like a cane and materials in Braille. But OCR never took any action.

He told 社区黑料 that he 鈥渆nded up bailing the school system鈥� and now homeschools his children, while also serving as a 鈥渇acilitator鈥� in meetings between parents and educators to develop students鈥� special education plans, especially those related to job coaching and transition plans after high school.

鈥淚 really want to make sure that students receive the services that they’re entitled to,鈥� he said. 

That鈥檚 what he when he gave his three-minute statement on the January call with parents and advocates. Like several parents and advocates who participated, he said no one voiced support for moving oversight of special education to HHS. 

鈥淚t might not be the change that we wanted,鈥� he said, 鈥渂ut change does need to happen.鈥�

Federal officials Tuesday that the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services will move to the Department of Health and Human Services, while the Office for Civil Rights will shift to the Department of Justice. It鈥檚 a decision that鈥檚 been in the making for more than a year, as the administration has attempted to dismantle the Education Department .

At a press conference Tuesday, senior department officials as new partnerships between the agencies. The officials said the changes won鈥檛 impact or reduce students鈥� rights, but instead improve efficiency. Senior department officials participated in the briefing on the condition that the speakers wouldn鈥檛 be identified by name. Education Secretary Linda McMahon did not take part.

Both the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services and the Office for Civil Rights will retain some original functions, according to federal . But many specifics, such as staffing decisions and timelines, are still under discussion, the officials said. 

Special education advocates have protested that moving programs, including civil rights oversight, out of the Education Department will harm students with disabilities. 

In a  Tuesday, McMahon acknowledged that too many families must still fight for timely and appropriate special education services for their children. She said the changes will 鈥渂reak down bureaucratic barriers and strengthen the coordination of resources to improve programs.鈥�

鈥淚t should not require herculean effort to obtain what the law guarantees,鈥� McMahon said. 鈥淎s the Trump administration scales back federal micromanagement when it hinders success, we are equally committed to bolstering the efficacy of federal oversight where it is essential.鈥�

The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services oversees the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a landmark set of statutes that guarantee more than 8 million children with disabilities the right to attend public school. Critics say moving responsibility to HHS means taking oversight away from experts in specialized instruction and handing it to an agency ill-equipped to administer non-medical programs.

鈥淢oving IDEA oversight into HHS pushes students with disabilities toward a medical model, where disability is treated as a diagnosis to manage instead of a natural part of human life,鈥� Robyn Linscott, a director at The Arc of the United States, said in a Tuesday press release. 鈥淲hen that mindset drives education decisions, students are more likely to be segregated, underestimated or treated as separate from the school community.鈥�

The Education Department the special ed office already overlaps with HHS programs for people with disabilities.

The Office for Civil Rights has been a key avenue of relief for parents unable to get services for their children through complaints filed with their state, mediation, administrative hearings or due process cases. Families in states lacking local enforcement of special education complaints depend on OCR to investigate discrimination.

McMahon said in her statement that the partnership between OCR and the Justice Department will provide more responsive and coordinated enforcement of civil rights laws.

鈥淥CR and DOJ will combine their expertise and capacity to bolster evaluation, investigation, resolution of complaints and, above all, enforce critical protections for all students,鈥� she said.

Senior education department officials said during Tuesday鈥檚 press conference that OCR will refer complaints to the Justice Department for evaluation, investigation and resolution. The agency will still be in charge of case settlements, civil rights data collection and state assistance, and will make final determinations on whether to pursue action by referring cases to the Justice Department for enforcement.

Though McMahon said the moves will improve student and family outcomes, The American Federation of Government Employees Local 252, which represents 2,000 Education Department staffers, said the shift is breaking down government processes instead of streamlining them. 

鈥淭his isn’t efficiency 鈥� it’s chaos. Previous interagency agreements divvying up both P-12 and higher education programs to other federal agencies have led to massive delays in congressionally mandated funding and confusion for federal employees and the public alike,鈥� union President Rachel Gittleman said in an emailed statement. 鈥淭hat’s an insult to the millions of students and families who rely on these services and the taxpayers who count on federal oversight to prevent waste, fraud and abuse.” 

The Trump administration is using interagency agreements to circumvent to close the Education Department, a move that House members have warned would 鈥渃reate inefficiencies鈥� and 鈥渃ause delays and administrative challenges.鈥� When the Department of Labor picked up career and technical education last year, for example, some states had to wait months to access millions of dollars in funding.

鈥淲e wouldn’t be able to function as an organization without him,鈥� said Superintendent Jennifer Gaffney. 鈥淎 lot of what students, teachers and our office staff do is centered around the use of technology and data systems. He is the backbone of all that.鈥�

But now Gaffney doesn鈥檛 know how much longer she can rely on the federal dollars that pay his salary. The Rural Education Achievement Program is among the 17 funding sources that the Trump administration wants to roll into a . Congress approved $220 million for REAP this year, but under the president鈥檚 plan, governors and state education chiefs would decide whether rural districts would get extra money.

Monty Mayer, superintendent of the Velva Public Schools in North Dakota, about 20 miles southeast of Minot, used the $14,000 he received from the program this year to pay teaching assistants to work with students who were behind academically.

鈥淢oney rolled into a block grant would be swallowed up by the bigger schools as their needs are much greater than ours,鈥� he said. That would leave 鈥渟mall rural schools looking to find answers in different places without a clear picture as to where those resources would come from.鈥�

During with the Senate appropriations committee in late April, Education Secretary Linda McMahon faced several questions from both Democrats and Republicans about the future of the program. She suggested that REAP was underutilized.

鈥淎 lot of rural schools do not have grant writers, cannot bring in the resources other states might have or other cities might have,鈥� she said. 鈥淎 lot of states never participated in any of the grant funding.鈥�

Under a consolidated program, she said, all states would receive a portion of the block grant and officials would decide 鈥渉ow this money should be spent in their state, where the greatest needs are, whether that’s in rural communities.鈥�

Officials with years of experience in rural education say that isn鈥檛 how REAP works. States or districts don鈥檛 write grant proposals for the funding, said Steven Johnson, superintendent of the Fort Ransom Public School District, which operates one elementary school in southeast North Dakota. Districts , based on size and location, receive an invitation to apply. And most do, Johnson said.

鈥淚t鈥檚 rarely about capacity or lack of grant-writing ability. If anything, what we鈥檙e seeing is the opposite,鈥� he said. 鈥淩ural districts rely on REAP because it is simple, direct and does not require extensive administrative capacity.鈥�

Abigail Swisher, who previously worked on the REAP program at the department, said where rural districts struggle is applying for large, competitive grant programs.

“Applying for competitive federal grants is time-consuming and complex. Larger districts are hiring grant writers who have the specialized expertise and who have time,” she said. “That’s exactly why we have the REAP program. It was designed by Congress to help fill that gap.”

There were efforts to help rural districts access those other programs, she said, but those ended with the new administration.

鈥楾esting and reporting standards鈥� 

Districts that for Small, Rural School Achievement funding, one of the two REAP programs, have fewer than 600 students and are located in an area their state defines as rural. Others, with 20% of students who live below the poverty line, qualify for the Rural and Low-Income School program, and some are eligible for both. This year, 17,873 were eligible for one or both programs.

Last week, Kirstin Baesler, the assistant secretary of Elementary and Secondary Education, that they have considerable leeway to use federal funds for programs like tutoring or after-school programs.聽

But Johnson said that flexibility was 鈥渙ne of the original core concepts behind REAP.鈥� His district, for example, didn鈥檛 have enough poor students to qualify for Title I funding, but under existing law, he was able to use federal funds to provide students with reading and math tutoring.

Congress created REAP as part of No Child Left Behind, the 2001 federal accountability law that set strict expectations for school improvement, and reauthorized the program as part of the Every Student Succeeds Act. Despite their small size, rural districts were not exempt from NCLB鈥檚 mandates, Johnson said. 

鈥淪mall, rural schools were expected to meet the same testing and reporting standards as larger systems but often lacked the staffing and resources to do so,鈥� he said.

A from AASA, the School Superintendents Association, showed that districts most commonly used the funds for technology, followed by staff training, compensation and expanding programs like STEM and arts for students. When Johnson asked other administrators across the country, they listed bullying prevention, special education assistants and support to help students graduate among the ways they use the funds.

鈥淩ural districts piece together budgets with many smaller sources,鈥� said Margaret Buckton, a school finance consultant in Iowa. Although REAP 鈥渋sn’t a huge sum, when combined with other small grants, it likely makes a difference.鈥�

Questions of 鈥榚fficacy鈥�

In her exchanges with Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, a Republican who has made rural schools a priority, McMahon questioned whether the program has a positive impact.

“Many of these programs have lost their efficacy and they really are not returning, giving the returns that we hope to see for rural schools,” McMahon said.

The Department of Education did not respond to questions about what data McMahon was referring to when she said the program wasn鈥檛 effective. But Melissa Sadorf, executive director of the National Rural Education Association, said because districts can use the funds in a variety of ways, the department looks primarily at compliance issues rather than impact on students.

鈥淭here is no single, consistent student outcome measure applied across grantees,鈥� she said. 鈥淭he program has not been the subject of a comprehensive federal evaluation in close to a decade, which makes any sweeping claim about effectiveness difficult to substantiate from the data.鈥�

That was mostly a summary of the challenges facing rural schools, like transportation and teacher recruitment, and what the department was doing to support them.

The department also tracks whether districts comply with the rules for using the funds.

A in the Custer County, Colorado, district, for example, discovered an accounting error because a staff member entered data using hand-written notes. The same issue came up in Indiana鈥檚 in 2022. The department鈥檚 website doesn鈥檛 list any reports conducted since McMahon took office.

The administration pitched the same block grant idea last year, and Congress ultimately rejected it. With the appropriations process likely to drag out for months, it鈥檚 unclear whether lawmakers will be more receptive this year. 

But for rural districts like Sackets Harbor, the site of an important naval base during the war of 1812, the continued uncertainty over federal funding is 鈥渦nnerving,鈥� said Gaffney, the superintendent. 

The district鈥檚 annual , in which students fanned out across the historic town for service projects, like gardening and polishing headstones, is popular with local residents. The school board asked voters to approve a nearly 8% tax increase, which they did. But with increases in English learners and students with disabilities, Gaffney said the district is still under 鈥渁 great deal of financial pressure.鈥�

鈥淭hat is precisely why every dollar matters to us, including REAP funding,鈥� she said. 鈥淭hese resources are vital in helping us maintain programs, services and opportunities for our students.鈥�

A private meeting between the Senate education committee and Education Secretary Linda McMahon was canceled Wednesday after Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, a Democrat, invited the press to listen in. 鈥淚 was unwilling to accept the notion that the discussion of matters of this magnitude, that matter so much to Virginians, could only be behind closed doors,鈥� he told reporters.

He said he was willing to back down if the secretary would commit to appearing before the committee within the next six weeks. In December, Democrats to participate in a hearing to discuss efforts to shut down the Department of Education, but that hasn鈥檛 happened. Following passage of the 2026 budget in January, Congress asked to meet regularly with officials for updates on the interagency agreements with other agencies, but Kaine added that he鈥檚 unaware if those have taken place.

鈥淚n my view,鈥� he said, 鈥渢he secretary and other leaders have pursued a strategy that is unlawful in taking programs within the Department of Education that are statutory in nature and sort of willy nilly ending them, shrinking them or handing them over to other agencies.鈥�

In , GOP Sen. Bill Cassidy, chair of the committee, said 鈥淒emocrats will not dictate the terms of today鈥檚 meeting and have lost the chance to speak to the Secretary today.鈥�

McMahon hasn鈥檛 appeared before the committee since her confirmation hearing over a year ago. On X, : 鈥淚t鈥檚 disappointing that instead of a productive conversation about the state of our nation鈥檚 students and the steps we鈥檙e taking at the Department of Education to reverse this trend and break up the bureaucracy, this became about producing another media clip for MSNBC.鈥�

It was only three months ago that Congress the Trump administration鈥檚 last attempt to slash education spending and roll an array of programs into a block grant.

From the reception that some members of the Senate Appropriations Committee gave U.S. Education Secretary Linda McMahon on Tuesday, it appeared not much has changed. 

Both Republicans and Democrats grilled the secretary over the Trump administration鈥檚 plan to cut funding for rural schools and programs that help low-income students enter and complete college. 

Consolidating $220 million for rural education with 16 other programs 鈥� including literacy grants, education for homeless students and afterschool programs 鈥� into a $2 billion Make Education Great Again grant program would 鈥渦ndermine the goals of helping our K through 12 schools,鈥� Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, chair of the committee, told McMahon. 鈥淧rotecting rural schools and rural communities has always been one of my top priorities.鈥� 

Throughout the two-hour hearing, McMahon defended the president鈥檚 $76.5 billion , saying that although 鈥渋t is a reduction,鈥� the block grant proposal 鈥� a long time goal for conservatives 鈥� would give states more say over how to spend federal dollars. The so-called MEGA grant program will prioritize reading and math, McMahon said, and 鈥渦nleash momentous opportunity for every child to realize their God-given potential.鈥�

The budget would maintain funding for Title I, serving high-poverty schools, at $18.4 million, and boost spending for students with disabilities by over $500 million. 

But the proposal includes a 35% cut to the Office for Civil Rights and eliminates some programs completely. Those include $428 million in services for migrant children and what is known as TRIO, a batch of programs that prepare students for higher education as early as middle school. 

鈥淚 oppose the administration’s proposal to 鈥� eliminate a program that enjoys robust support and has made such a difference in the lives of children,鈥� Collins said, noting that three of her staff members would not have attended college without TRIO.

She was among the six Republicans and six Democrats who sent McMahon earlier this month objecting to how the department has altered two of the TRIO grants to direct students toward the workforce instead of college. 

鈥淐ollege is not the only solution for everyone,鈥� McMahon told the members.

Sen. Jeff Merkley, a Democrat from Oregon, cited data showing that low-income, high school students who participate in Upward Bound are more than twice as likely to earn a bachelor鈥檚 degree by age 24 than their peers who don鈥檛 participate. 

鈥淭he stats from these programs are pretty damn impressive,鈥� he said. 

Even Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota, who has authored that would eliminate the Education Department, called TRIO a “sensitive area鈥� and urged McMahon to consider the committee鈥檚 concerns. 

Other Republicans praised the secretary for continuing efforts to shut down the department in the face of extensive criticism.

鈥淵ou are so cool, literally and figuratively,鈥� said Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana. 鈥淭hey call you names, and you just ignore them.鈥�

鈥�50 years of progress鈥�

To some Democrats, McMahon has also turned her back on parents who don鈥檛 want to see special education offloaded to another agency. The secretary said her team still hasn鈥檛 decided what would happen to programs that fall under the Individuals with Disabilities Act. Some might go to the Department of Labor, while others could go to the Department of Health and Human Services, she said.

鈥淚’ve gotten a petition from thousands of parents, educators, advocates who are concerned that will really undermine 50 years of progress in making sure the rights of children and students with disabilities are met,鈥� said Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, ranking member of the committee.

Both Murray and Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut clashed with McMahon over the way her staff has handled civil rights enforcement. 

鈥淗ow do you defend that not a single child in Connecticut got a positive resolution from the Department of Education for their discrimination claims?鈥� Murphy asked her. 鈥淪eventy of them had disability claims.鈥�

While he鈥檚 not on the committee, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent, released a calling McMahon鈥檚 OCR 鈥渢he least productive in over a decade.鈥� The document notes that the office reached 鈥渮ero resolution agreements for students facing serious traumatic incidents including sexual harassment, sexual violence, seclusion, restraint, racial harassment and discriminatory school discipline.鈥�

He cited a January government watchdog report showing that putting OCR staff on paid leave last year, after she tried to fire them, cost taxpayers at least $38 million. 

McMahon insisted that the administration was ramping up efforts to address such complaints and seemed confused that the president calls for a $49 million cut to OCR, bringing the budget to $91 million.

鈥淭hat’s a floor number,鈥� she said. 鈥淗opefully we’ll have the ability to increase that number.鈥�

She ordered OCR staff on leave to return in December to address a backlog of cases, and is supervisors and attorneys for regional offices. An internal memo, shared with 社区黑料, shows the regional directors would go to Denver, Seattle and the D.C. offices. But according to an OCR attorney, who asked not to be named for fear of retaliation, there have been 鈥渓ots of departures鈥� among those McMahon brought back. 

鈥極verdue for a debate鈥�

Some who watched the exchanges between McMahon and the committee Tuesday were struck by the level of bipartisanship over the TRIO program.

鈥淚t shows the kind of Congressional support these programs have built up over many years, and the strong constituencies they have behind them,鈥� said Maureen Tracey-Mooney, associate director of FutureEd, a Georgetown University think tank. Previously, she led K-12 policy development for the Biden White House.

She added that the programs that McMahon aims to wrap into the MEGA program 鈥渇ocus on the most vulnerable student groups.鈥� 

Those would include students who need after-school care and are currently served by the 21st Century Community Learn Centers program. 

鈥淲hat do you do once they leave the classroom when they’re so young and they can’t obviously take care of themselves at home?鈥� asked Republican Sen. Shelley Capito of West Virginia.

McMahon responded that it would be up to states to decide whether after-school programs are a priority for them.鈥淲e’re certainly overdue for a debate about how to best support our nation’s students,鈥� Tracey-Mooney said. 鈥淏ut I think we are unlikely to see a rigorous engagement in Congress with these ideas through the budget process.鈥�

You cannot claim to support literacy while slashing the very programs that help children become readers, stay healthy and succeed in school.

For more than two decades, I have worked alongside families as a social worker, nonprofit leader and education advocate. Today, I lead Families In Schools, a nonprofit that equips parents with the tools, knowledge and confidence to support their children鈥檚 learning. I have seen firsthand what happens when families have the support they need 鈥� and what happens when they do not.

The parents we work with remind me of my own parents. My father came to this country through the Bracero program and, like so many parents, trusted public schools to create opportunities for his children. I was the first in my family to graduate from college. That should not be the exception for children in communities like mine.

I benefited from programs that helped me succeed. Today, too many families risk losing those same opportunities.

The president鈥檚 Fiscal Year 2027 budget proposal would take 17 education programs that families rely on and roll them into a single block grant, cutting their funding from $6.47 billion to just $2 billion.

This is not reform. It is a dismantling.

Under this proposal, funding would no longer be dedicated to specific programs. Instead, states would receive significantly reduced amounts of money, with broad discretion over how it is spent. There would be no requirement to maintain investments in afterschool activities that keep children safe while parents work, college access programs like TRIO and Gear UP, community schools, family engagement efforts, academic supports and services for homeless children.

Programs like these aid more than 26 million students from low-income families. With reduced funding and no dedicated protections, they would be pitted against one another, and many would be at risk of disappearing altogether. But these programs are not extras; they are lifelines.

Families and educators know exactly what these cuts could mean.

They could mean parents working a second job scrambling to find somewhere safe for their child to go after school. They could mean English learners losing critical assistance in the classroom, or community schools having to cut back on health care, counseling, food assistance and other basic services that enable children to learn.

And they could mean family engagement 鈥� one of the most powerful drivers of student success 鈥� being pushed even further to the margins.

Parents are children鈥檚 first teachers and their most fierce and stalwart advocates. Literacy development begins at birth, in play and conversation with caregivers. Kids learn to love reading when people they love read to them. If they are struggling or falling behind, it鈥檚 usually the parents or caregivers who fight to make sure they get the help they need, whether that means demanding testing, changing schools or finding tutoring and afterschool activities. Children do not learn in a vacuum. They learn best when their families have the tools, information and resources to be active partners in their education.

The programs on the chopping block have been in place for decades, and they define 鈥渆vidence-based.鈥� They have been evaluated, showing improvements in attendance, academic outcomes and the ability of families to better support their children鈥檚 success.

Walking away from them puts that progress at risk.

States and local districts cannot absorb cuts of this . Families cannot simply make up the difference with time they do not have, money they cannot spare or resources that may not exist.

Parents, educators and policymakers all want children to read, succeed in school and build better futures for themselves. But literacy cannot just be a slogan, and literacy skills cannot be learned if children鈥檚 overall developmental needs are not met.

If children are truly to succeed, Congress should reject the president’s proposed cuts and protect the programs students and families rely on every day.

Last fall, U.S. Department of Education officials that transferring major K-12 programs to the Department of Labor would be 鈥渕ore difficult鈥� than its earlier move of career-and-technical education programs to that agency.

They鈥檙e not even going to try this year. 

To the relief of state leaders and education advocates, the department told education chiefs Friday that they would continue to access millions of dollars in Title I and other 鈥渇ormula鈥� grants under the Every Student Succeeds Act through the system that鈥檚 already familiar to state staff. 

鈥淲e have heard your concerns,鈥� Kirstin Baesler, assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education, told chiefs on Friday. The pause on handing that responsibility over to the Labor Department means districts won鈥檛 need to worry about funds arriving in time to plan for next school year 鈥� a situation that caught schools off guard last summer when the administration held up funding for a month.

Sticking with the Education Department鈥檚 system, Baesler wrote, would give everyone involved 鈥渕ore time to collaborate on procedures, processes and training to ensure states are set up to successfully receive and draw down formula funds.鈥� 

In recent weeks Education Secretary Linda McMahon and former Labor Secretary Lori Chavez DeRemer have jointly announced four smaller grant competitions related to , school leadership, and charter schools. Those funds will flow through a Labor Department grant platform. But some observers suggest the department鈥檚 decision to hang on to its largest K-12 program is an acknowledgement that the transition hasn鈥檛 been smooth. Title I serves roughly 25 million students.

鈥淭hat’s an important milestone to miss and a sign that the partnership has been rocky and poorly executed,鈥� said Braden Goetz, a senior policy adviser at New America, a left-of-center think tank. He previously directed the policy and research team focusing on career, technical and adult education at the Education Department, the first office to be transferred to the Labor Department.

State officials reported numerous complications last year in trying to access CTE funds, like error messages in the system. The Illinois State Department of Education waited several weeks to get its funding and spokeswoman Lindsay Record said communication from the Department of Labor often came 鈥渨ith little notice and without the benefit of the Department of Education鈥檚 expertise in overseeing education programs.鈥�  

States don鈥檛 want a repeat of that situation when they try to pull down roughly $28 billion in funds this summer. 

Competitive grants, like the ones McMahon and Chavez-DeRemer recently announced, are one thing. But Title I and other formula programs for all states 鈥渁re a different, and much larger and more essential, responsibility altogether,鈥� said Amy Loyd, president and CEO of All4Ed, an advocacy group. 

The Rhode Island Department of Education was another agency that experienced difficulties using the Labor Department鈥檚 system last year. Spokesman Victor Morente said Commissioner Ang茅lica Infante-Green appreciates Baesler allowing 鈥渁dditional time for preparedness鈥� with the formula funds, but added that 鈥渇urther clarity on how the new interagency plans will be implemented is absolutely necessary to avoid disruption and confusion related to funding concerns.鈥�

Along with state officials, staff within the Education Department “persistently communicated” to leaders that moving to Labor’s grant system “would cause significant problems for states and students,” said Rachel Gittleman, president of the union representing department employees.聽

Baesler said she would discuss the matter further with chiefs when she meets with them virtually May 7.

House committee vote

Congress also expressed concerns last year with the batch of 鈥渋nteragency agreements鈥� McMahon has initiated as she works to eliminate the department. Members warned that the actions would 鈥渃reate inefficiencies鈥� and 鈥渃ause delays and administrative challenges.鈥�

The agreements are illegal according to a group of states and districts that have the dismantling of the department. But on Tuesday, the House education committee took the first step toward writing those agreements into law. 

The Republican majority passed a bill that formally moves adult education programs to the Labor Department. Rep. Tim Walberg of Michigan, who chairs the committee, said the move makes it easier for adults to 鈥渕ove from basic skills to training to employment within a more coordinated system.鈥�

Goetz disagreed. In , he said taking the program out of the Education Department changes it into 鈥渁 funnel to low-wage jobs鈥� and turns it over to those without expertise in reading and math.

Even so, aside from Baesler鈥檚 Friday announcement, he doesn鈥檛 expect the administration to slow down its work to distribute education programs to other agencies. Chavez-DeRemer鈥檚 resignation this week, following that she used Labor funds for personal trips and had an affair with an employee, could even accelerate the process, he said.

Savannah Newhouse, a spokeswoman for the Education Department, dismissed the idea that Chavez-DeRemer鈥檚 actions got in the way of carrying out President Donald Trump鈥檚 executive order to shut down the department. 

鈥淪uggesting one departure would affect these partnerships misunderstands how they鈥檙e structured,鈥� she said. 鈥淭hese partnerships are with agencies best equipped to manage federal education programs without disruption.鈥�

Still, she appreciated the reason the Carter administration summoned her father to the nation鈥檚 capital. , a prominent researcher who focused on school integration, was part of a team tasked with creating a new cabinet-level education agency. 

was to bring all of the various education programs scattered across multiple departments under one roof.

鈥淚 remember the sense of fervor and purpose that surrounded the work that they were doing,鈥� she said. 

Almost 50 years later, Miles leads Education Resource Strategies, an organization that helps districts make sense of regulations tied to department funds. She鈥檚 quite familiar with complaints that those rules are confusing and can make spending money difficult, but the grumbling hasn’t changed her view about the department鈥檚 original mission. 

鈥淧art of the federal role,鈥� she said, 鈥渋s to be a safeguard for the nation in the stewardship of those dollars.鈥�

Such requirements are at the center of a long-running debate over the department鈥檚 existence. With her most recent announcement that the Treasury Department would , Education Secretary Linda McMahon is reversing history and redistributing her department鈥檚 major responsibilities across the federal government. K-12 programs are going to the Labor Department, while the Department of Health and Human Services is expected to absorb special education.

Like President Donald Trump, McMahon dismisses her staff鈥檚 oversight functions as unnecessarily burdensome and says parceling out the department鈥檚 functions will . Washington should 鈥済et out of the way,鈥� she said in January when she granted Iowa a waiver to blend some federal funds into a block grant.

But others say those rules ensure that schools spend the money the way Congress intended. 

鈥淭he more flexibility you have, the more you run the risk that people may take advantage of that flexibility,鈥� said Vic Klatt, who worked at the department during George H.W. Bush鈥檚 administration and then spent several years working on education policy for House Republicans. 

鈥楯ust very loose鈥�

During a , McMahon defended her actions and described the Education Department as a mere 鈥減ass-through鈥� agency for funds Congress appropriates. Before the department was established, programs like Title I for low-income students and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 鈥渨ere handled very well,鈥� she said.  

But that wasn鈥檛 what civil rights advocates found when they took an extensive look at how districts spent the funds. An often-cited example from their report was how the Claiborne Parish schools in Louisiana used Title I funds, meant to improve achievement among educationally 鈥渄eprived children,鈥� to build two Olympic-sized swimming pools at Black schools.

A school in Oakland, California, used the money for an exercise program to 鈥減revent heart trouble鈥� and increase the 鈥渇low of blood to the brain,鈥� the report found. When parents asked if the funds might be better used to teach their kids to read, school officials told them that the P.E. program would improve the students鈥� reading skills.

鈥淚t was just very loose,鈥� said Nora Gordon, a Georgetown University professor who has written extensively about the history of Title I. 鈥淭hey weren鈥檛 breaking the law at the time, but they were violating the spirit of the law.鈥�

Title I was meant to be supplemental. Districts had to 鈥渟ign an assurance鈥� that they wouldn鈥檛 cut their own spending when they received Title I funds, the report said, but there were no penalties for doing so. Audits uncovered numerous examples of districts using Title I to pay for general expenses that should have been covered with state and local funds, like building classrooms and stocking libraries with books at Black schools. 

When Congress amended the Elementary and Secondary Education Act , members wrote a 鈥渟upplement, not supplant鈥� provision into the law 鈥� three words that have generated immense confusion through the years. The rule has prompted countless 鈥済uidance鈥� documents that can be equally confusing and spawned a cottage industry of consultants and lawyers who advise districts how to avoid mistakes.聽

The department, for example, presumes that districts are supplanting if they used state or local funds to cover an expense in the previous year or if they鈥檙e spending federal funds on something the state mandates, like teacher training in the science of reading. 

Some argue that the department has gone so overboard with requirements for documentation that states and districts worry more about compliance than whether the students those programs are meant to help are making any progress. 

In 2006, an Office of the Inspector General review found almost 588 requirements related to the No Child Left Behind Act 鈥� so many that a manual describing states鈥� and districts鈥� responsibilities only included about 60% of them. The Inspector General questioned whether all those rules were necessary.聽

鈥淪ure, there is flexibility in how you spend federal dollars,鈥� said JoLynn Berge, deputy superintendent and chief financial officer at the Northshore School District near Seattle. 鈥淏ut you really have to be this high-level expert to understand how to comply with the rules.鈥�

Lucky for Northshore, she is. She previously oversaw district finances for the Seattle Public Schools and before that, worked for the Washington state superintendent鈥檚 office, where she monitored districts鈥� use of federal dollars. She sees value in the push for flexible block grants instead of holding funds for different programs 鈥渋n these little buckets,鈥� each with their own rules. 

鈥淵ou have to trust that people are going to do things right,鈥� she said. There will always be 鈥渂ad actors,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut that鈥檚 what you have auditors for.鈥�

For some district leaders, procurement rules 鈥� those governing how districts purchase everything from tutoring services to software programs 鈥� are a common frustration. To use federal funds, like those for kids with disabilities, a district has to conduct a bidding process.

But that timeline can stretch out for weeks and cause delays in students getting the help they need, said Jay Toland, chief financial officer for the Cumberland, North Carolina, district.

鈥淪ometimes we might have to do something on the fly with exceptional children,鈥� he said, like hiring a speech pathologist. 鈥漌e’re still providing those services; we just have to find another funding source.鈥�

鈥楻颈蝉办-补惫别谤蝉别鈥�

According to McMahon, states and districts should have more say over how they spend federal dollars. During the extended government shutdown last fall, her team took to social media to mock the department鈥檚 oversight role.

鈥淲e might be away from our desks attending strategic assessments, creating more red tape and doing nothing to improve student outcomes,鈥� said the post, signed 鈥渂ureaucratically yours.鈥� 

But the Education Department isn鈥檛 the only agency that asks districts to complete tedious administrative tasks, and many of those will stay in place whether the department exists or not. 

The requirement that school staff document they spend on a federal grant, for example, comes from the Office of Management and Budget. 

States are known for layering their own rules on top of the federal guidelines. Jeremy Vidito, chief financial officer for the Detroit schools, previously worked in California and Louisiana, but called Michigan 鈥渢he most restrictive place鈥� he鈥檚 worked when it comes to spending federal dollars. 

鈥淭hey must approve all travel and conferences in advance. They approve service vendors and materials,鈥� he said. 鈥淎t this point, we know what they will and won’t approve, so we don’t try to do anything creative.鈥�

The public also has expectations for how districts spend that money. 

The law requires districts to spend Title I in schools with poverty rates of 75% or higher, and they can direct funds to schools with much lower poverty rates if they have some left over. Berge, in the Northshore district, described it as 鈥減eanut buttering鈥� the funds around to keep everyone happy. Legally, leaders could concentrate that money in just the poorest schools, but pushback from the community would be intense. 

鈥淭he federal government doesn’t prohibit you from doing that. You’re just dealing with local politics,鈥� said Marguerite Roza, who directs the Edunomics Lab at Georgetown University and advises districts nationwide on budget and spending issues. 

With achievement gaps wider since the pandemic, and low-performing students continuing to lose ground, she challenges districts to rethink how they spend Title I. But district officials, she said, are a 鈥渞isk-averse鈥� group and tend to stick with spending plans that state officials and auditors have signed off on in the past. 

In conversation with a group of districts last fall, she proposed that they use all of their Title I funds to pay non-teaching staff members, like instructional coaches and assistant principals, to work as tutors for low-income students. One leader from a midsized Midwestern district said the idea wouldn鈥檛 work because Title I instructors must be certified teachers. Roza reminded her that tutoring isn鈥檛 core instruction. 

鈥淪o this was actually a non-issue,鈥� she said. 

California provides another example of how districts can get locked into misconceptions about what鈥檚 allowed. In 2012, advocates for arts education found that districts were reluctant to use Title I funds for the arts even though the U.S. Department of Education encouraged it. A 鈥渃ulture of 鈥榝ear of reprisal鈥� seemed to permeate the Title I world,鈥� . 

It took a letter from the state education department and extra assurance from a federal official to convince districts it was OK. Klatt, the retired Congressional staffer, is among those who predict that even if some federal rules disappear, district leaders will likely still manage those funds like nothing has changed.

鈥淚t鈥檚 hard to break that mold,鈥� he said.

But there鈥檚 another reason, experts say, why those spending federal dollars might not be able to tell much difference between this administration and those that came before. Other than granting the Iowa waiver, which observers say was not a significant change, McMahon has mostly reiterated what the law already allows. 

In January, she released a letter highlighting the way schools can use Title I funds for improvements (on the books since 1978) and blend federal grants with state and local funds (added in 1994). She鈥檚 made similar announcements about 鈥渆xisting鈥� flexibilities related to , transferred to the Labor Department last year. 

If anything, Klatt doesn鈥檛 buy McMahon鈥檚 argument that moving K-12 programs there is a way to lighten the bureaucratic load. After all, it鈥檚 the agency that enforces strict rules related to and . 

鈥淎lmost everybody at the Labor Department,鈥� he said, 鈥渋s involved in some kind of regulatory activity.鈥� 

Ironically, the announcement comes as the administration is aggressively inserting itself in state and local education decision-making through a little-known administrative process. 

A General Services Administration that would require almost all applicants for federal funds to certify compliance with federal laws, executive orders and regulations 鈥� including non-discrimination laws 鈥� would also mandate adherence to the administration鈥檚 interpretation of what is discriminatory. In doing so, the announcement suggests that the Trump administration is interested not just in enforcing the law, but in discouraging efforts to increase diversity in education and beyond. 

The document treats 鈥渄iversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility鈥� initiatives as potentially discriminatory, including, for example, statements used by many employers to encourage applicants from various backgrounds. It rejects what the administration calls 鈥渃ultural competence鈥� requirements, potentially imperiling teaching practices that connect instruction to students鈥� backgrounds. And it would likely ban questions asking applicants to describe how they have overcome obstacles, as colleges are increasingly doing in the wake of the 2023 Supreme Court ruling striking down affirmative action in admissions. States and school districts found in violation of the proposed requirements would be subject to funding reductions, civil liability or even criminal prosecution 鈥� stark consequences for refusing to conform to administration policy. 

The GSA鈥檚 proposal flies in the face of studies showing that teacher diversity benefits all students.

demonstrates that student and teacher diversity in schools and colleges helps Black, Hispanic and other traditionally underserved students achieve in school and beyond. As FutureEd noted in a , when students of color have teachers of color, attendance, academic achievement and college enrollment increase and disciplinary infractions decline. 

The research has an important bearing on the performance of the nation鈥檚 schools, given that students of color comprise more than 50% of public-school enrollment nationally, while nearly 80% of teachers in the country鈥檚 schools are white.

White students also benefit from having teachers of color. In a of four East Coast school districts, white students who studied under a teacher of color reported working harder and being more confident in their abilities than those who did not. Among the potential reasons for the greater engagement: Teachers of color were more likely to believe that student intelligence is malleable rather than fixed and to address student misbehavior in ways that didn鈥檛 damage classroom climate.

For their part, teachers value diversity in their ranks. In a national survey of K-12 teachers conducted for by the RAND Corp., 81% of participants said it is 鈥渋mportant or extremely important鈥� for students of color to be taught by teachers of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds, and 79% said it is 鈥渋mportant or extremely important鈥� to have colleagues of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds.

Of course, subject matter expertise and effective teaching experience should be paramount in hiring decisions. And anyone who receives federal funds should comply with non-discrimination law. But the GSA announcement would put at risk diversity initiatives that are valuable in schools and would seemingly pass legal muster. 

It鈥檚 the latest administration move against diversity in education. Weeks into President Donald Trump鈥檚 second term, the Department of Education canceled hundreds of millions of dollars in grants awarded under the previous administration that had already been distributed and sought in part to increase educator diversity. 

Then, the department issued a that sought to eliminate DEI programs in school districts and institutions of higher education. It was subsequently struck down by the courts, and the department of Education dropped its appeal in January, only weeks before GSA鈥檚 proposal was released. This suggests that the administration is trying to achieve through administrative means what it failed to accomplish with last year鈥檚 letter. 

If the Trump administration wants to ensure appropriate enforcement of anti-discrimination laws in education, it has the tools to do so through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Education鈥檚 Office for Civil Rights. Unfortunately, the administration last year downsized OCR dramatically, leading a federal court to the reinstatement of hundreds of staffers so the agency could fulfill its duties. And staffing levels at the EEOC are down more than since the end of fiscal year .

The resulting cutback in civil rights enforcement under the Trump administration has been dramatic. As of December, OCR had , compared with 16,500 at the end of the Biden administration. 

Rather than staffing the federal government to enforce civil rights laws, the administration seems to be trying to weaken diversity efforts in schools by intimidating state and local educators with the threat of lost funding, criminal prosecution or civil liability into preemptively complying with its priorities, as it with its Dear Colleague Letter last year. 

But that tactic not only contradicts research on the value of educator diversity; it takes authority over teaching and learning out of the hands of the very leaders McMahon says she wants to empower. 

For Rachael Garnick, a former first grade teacher, the results were a reminder of how tough it’s been for schools to recover from historic declines in learning since the pandemic. 

鈥淭he literacy scores are still abysmal and we should be displeased,鈥� said Garnick, who heads the Pennsylvania Literacy Coalition. Made up of over 70 organizations, the group has pushed and state officials to fund and implement reading reform.

But despite the discouraging statewide results, she also sees districts, like in northeastern Pennsylvania and the Mohawk Area district, northwest of Pittsburgh, 鈥渢rending in the right direction,鈥� and demonstrating urgency over reading scores. Their attitude, she said, was 鈥渢he opposite of 鈥業f it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.鈥� Instead, 鈥業t鈥檚 broke; we鈥檝e got to fix it.鈥� 鈥� 

on pandemic learning loss from NWEA, an assessment company, captured that combination of frustration and hope over the state of academic recovery. About a third of schools have reached pre-COVID performance levels in reading or math, and just 14% have recovered in both subjects. But even some that were hit the hardest, like high-poverty schools, have made impressive gains.

The report was just the latest collection of results pointing to a long road ahead for most schools. Last year鈥檚 National Assessment of Educational Progress scores showed students in the majority of states losing more ground, but included a few standouts with strong progress, like Louisiana in reading and Alabama in math. And state test scores tell a similar story: few have topped pre-COVID performance.

It鈥檚 not like experts didn鈥檛 predict a slow recovery. 

鈥淚f student performance improvement follows historical prepandemic trends, it could take decades for students to fully catch up,鈥� researchers with McKinsey and Company, a consulting firm, .

Even the nation鈥檚 education chief isn鈥檛 expecting good news soon. 

鈥淚 would like to say that NAEP scores, when they come out again in January 2027, are going to show marked improvement,鈥� Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a recent K-12 Dive . 鈥淚 don鈥檛 think they are.鈥�

But Dan Goldhaber, director of the Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research, said it鈥檚 important to put NWEA data, and all measures of kids鈥� learning, in context.

鈥淥ne of the reasons that we’re not seeing recovery and that the results aren’t better is because of what was happening in the decade ,鈥� he said. 鈥淭here was a slow degradation of academic achievement.鈥�

Resisters and rebounders

Schools that were able to resist further declines during the pandemic are those that are more likely to be back on track, according to NWEA鈥檚 data, which represents five million students who took the MAP Growth tests through fall 2024. Such schools make up nearly three quarters of the recovered schools.

The Los Angeles-area is one example. 

Before the pandemic, the high-poverty, majority Latino district was already seeing gains on state assessments. When testing resumed in 2022, reading scores held steady. Math scores caught up the following year, and the district has continued to post gains ever since. 

Superintendent Darin Brawley highlighted a mix of academic routines, like a math problem of the day, weekly quizzes and challenging writing assignments, that the district continued despite the disruption of school closures. Teachers were encouraged to dial back their use of smart boards in the classroom and require students to keep math and language arts journals to improve retention. 

鈥淓verything was being done on the smart board and kids weren’t notating anything,鈥� Brawley said. 鈥淐ertain things have to be worked out on paper.鈥�

NWEA data also pointed to what the researchers call 鈥渞ebounder鈥� schools, those that saw significant drops in achievement but have been able to climb their way back. High-poverty schools are among those with impressive gains, but even districts seeing higher-than-ever performance still struggle to close wide achievement gaps.

鈥淲e’ve never had scores this high in English language arts or math,鈥� said Buffy Roberts, associate superintendent of the Charleston County schools in South Carolina. 鈥淚t’s been quite phenomenal.鈥�

She was talking about , which, unlike NWEA and NAEP, aren鈥檛 comparable because states don鈥檛 all measure proficiency the same. But they can still reflect post-COVID trends if states haven鈥檛 changed their tests since 2019. 

South Carolina鈥檚 math test has remained constant. Results show that statewide, scores have nearly recovered. It鈥檚 a trend that NWEA noted as well, explaining that while schools 鈥渓ost significant ground,鈥� in math, many made 鈥渟ubstantial gains afterward.鈥�

In Charleston, 54% of students in grades three through eight met or exceeded expectations in math last year, up from 48% in 2019 and about 10 percentage points higher than the state average. The district also made the Harvard Center for Education Policy Research鈥檚 fully recovered districts in the nation last year.

Roberts pointed to a swift return to in-person instruction and high-dosage tutoring as some of the factors contributing to strong growth. But she said at the outset of the pandemic, leaders 鈥渒new there were some vulnerable groups鈥� that would need 鈥渟tructures and support to mitigate some of that learning loss.鈥�

The district鈥檚 , she explained, provided extra dollars to schools with high-poverty students even when the schools didn鈥檛 qualify for federal Title I funding. The schools used the funds for extra staff to reduce class sizes, incentives to increase attendance and mental health services.

But there鈥檚 still a lot of work to do. In fourth grade math, there鈥檚 a more than 50 percentage point gap between white and Black students, and students from wealthier families outscore students in poverty by 39 percentage points. 

鈥淲e agree that progress must be faster,鈥� the district on Facebook after a conservative community group to the disparities. 

In an analysis of scores, Education Data Center researchers, led by Brown University鈥檚 Emily Oster, were hopeful about continued math recovery in 2026. Of the 32 states that have kept the same math test since before COVID, seven met or exceeded 2019 proficiency rates: Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Mississippi, Missouri, Rhode Island and Tennessee.

But even if they didn鈥檛, they all made some gains. Despite Pennsylvania鈥檚 decline in reading, for example, its performance in math is less than a percentage point from reaching the 2019 level. 

But the results in reading were less encouraging. Six out of 28 states have met or surpassed pre-pandemic performance. But several others, like Massachusetts, Minnesota and Oregon, remain well off that mark. 

Goldhaber, with CALDER, suggested that states haven鈥檛 seen improvement on tests because parents trust those scores less than the grades kids bring home on report cards and assignments. 

A recent reiterated that point. In a survey of over 2,000 parents, nearly three quarters said they believe grades more than tests when making decisions about their children鈥檚 learning. They鈥檙e also less likely to take action, like seeking out tutoring or other help for their child, when grades are good. 

The problem is that because of grade inflation, which was on the rise even before the pandemic, grades are a less accurate measure of how students are really doing. 

The results of that survey were no surprise to Bibb Hubbard, founder and CEO of Learning Heroes, a nonprofit that focuses on helping parents understand achievement data. She said she鈥檚 been 鈥渟creaming from the rooftops for 10 years鈥� that parents are about their kids鈥� performance. 

鈥淕ood grades do not equal grade level,鈥� she said. 鈥淧arents are deeply engaged, but we can鈥檛 afford to leave them on the sidelines relying on grades alone. The stakes are too high.鈥�

In total, 142 former staffers across six government agencies filed last month, arguing that the Trump administration appeared to target specific employees rather than carry out the reductions in an objective way.

鈥淚t’s very clear that this wasn’t a dispassionate, neutral workplace reorganization,鈥� said Jill Siegelbaum, a partner with Sligo Law Group, which brought the lawsuit with Lawyers for Good Government and the D.C. Law Collective. 鈥淚ndividuals were called unpatriotic. They were called lazy. There were all sorts of disparaging statements made about these individuals.鈥�

In her letter to staff put on leave last year, McMahon said the terminations had nothing to do with . But to , she characterized the problem as 鈥渂ureaucratic bloat鈥� and said that under her leadership, the department had kept 鈥渁ll of the right people, the good people.鈥� President Donald Trump many of the employees cut at the department 鈥渄on鈥檛 work at all鈥� and 鈥渘ever showed up to work.鈥� 

The action adds to mounting lawsuits over the mass layoffs. brought by Democratic-led states and school districts last year, officials argued that the reductions have left the department without adequate staff to do the work mandated by Congress. Last week, advocates for victims of sexual assault in a letter that the Office for Civil Rights didn鈥檛 resolve any complaints of sexual harassment or violence in 2025. Department officials say that the layoffs were necessary to cut red tape and give more control to the states.

In this latest case, the former employees say the administration denied their due process rights. The Education Department did not respond to questions about the case.

Denise Joseph, who lost her position in the Office of Postsecondary Education, found herself at odds with the new administration because of her work on diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

鈥淚 helped people get promotions. I helped protect the people from getting fired. I just mentored a lot of people,鈥� she said. 鈥淎nd I’m a Democrat, and so I don’t think they wanted someone like me.鈥�

She now runs a tutoring service and works part time for Kodely, a company that provides afterschool and summer programs. She also recently launched a campaign for a seat on the Charles County, Maryland, school board. 

Other Education Department plaintiffs include those who worked on special education, data collection, and career and technical education. Like Joseph, they have all filed an appeal to the government鈥檚 Merit Systems Protection Board, originally meant to be an independent body. The Trump administration has moved to weaken protections for career staff. According to the , the board has to adopt the government鈥檚 reasons for the employee鈥檚 dismissal and can no longer seek an outside review by a judge. 

The employees are 鈥渇aced with the potential harm of having their case heard by a completely captured administrative process,鈥� the complaint says. Plus, the attorneys argue, the board is so overwhelmed because of the layoffs that few appeals have progressed beyond initial steps.

When federal employees are fired 鈥渇or cause,鈥� the government is required to , like giving them advance notice and allowing them to respond to the reasons for their dismissal. 

Those steps protect the employees before they lose their benefits, Siegelbaum said. But the Education Department and the other agencies 鈥� Justice, State, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security and USAID 鈥� didn鈥檛 follow that process. According to the complaint, the agencies also relied on incorrect data when deciding who to cut. For example, Deborah Fisher, who worked for the State Department, had 39 years of federal service, but her layoff notice reflected only about 20 years.

Loyalty question

The administration holds that the president should have more say over the federal workforce and be able to replace staff with those more politically aligned. Those were the goals outlined in Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation document that Russell Vought spearheaded before he became director of the Office of Management and Budget.

He introduced a new hiring plan that included the question: 鈥淗ow would you help advance the President鈥檚 Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role?鈥� Unions representing federal employees in November, arguing that the 鈥渓oyalty question鈥� compels applicants to praise Trump鈥檚 policies or risk being punished for giving an honest answer.

In a separate move, the administration issued a that reclassified thousands of jobs across the government as 鈥減olicymaking positions鈥� without civil service protections. Democracy Forward, a nonprofit legal group that has challenged many of Trump鈥檚 policies, is over the regulation. 

Some experts say choosing federal employees based on partisanship is disruptive and can ultimately hurt the schools and students the department is meant to serve. Presidents already have to make 4,000 political appointments, and many don鈥檛 even stay for the full four years of an administration. The new rule potentially creates thousands more political positions, said Jenny Mattingley, a vice president at the nonprofit Partnership for Public Service. 

鈥淓very political administration would probably want to see responsiveness to their policies,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut with all that swirl and chaos, the people who suffer are the Americans on the ground who need those services.鈥�

Policymakers in Washington are starting to pay attention. Last year, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon named 鈥淓vidence-Based Literacy鈥� as her No. 1 academic priority. And this month, the House Appropriations Committee held a on the science of reading.

So what role should the federal government play in reading policy?

Unfortunately, it鈥檚 not as simple as stealing the playbook from the best-performing states. The so-called 鈥溾�� states of Mississippi, Tennessee, Alabama,and Louisiana have seen the biggest gains in recent years, and many states have tried to copy them with their own science of reading bills 鈥� to of success.

The federal government also has a record of big investments in reading not leading to improved outcomes. That鈥檚 at least partly because reading policy is tricky, given all the potential reasons a child may or may not understand the words on the page.

But that doesn鈥檛 mean federal leaders are helpless. They just need to find the right levers. Here are five potential ideas:

1. Create a new national reading panel

In 1997, Congress brought together a group of experts to 鈥渁ssess the status of research-based knowledge, including the effectiveness of various approaches to teaching children to read.鈥� After reviewing thousands of research articles, the group focused on five critical components of reading instruction 鈥� phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension.

The document that came out of that work, the , became a foundational text for the field. But it鈥檚 now decades old, and researchers know a lot more today than they did back then. It would be useful to have an update and a new consensus document from an esteemed body of experts.

2. Expand the National Assessment of Educational Progress

The NAEP exams have been instrumental in documenting the extent of students’ challenges, but they don’t say much about the underlying reasons why kids are having such reading comprehension problems.

For example, on , 46% of fourth graders couldn鈥檛 accurately understand the meaning of the word 鈥渃onform鈥� in a passage from the book The Tale of Despereaux by Kate DiCamillo. Was it because they didn鈥檛 understand the question, didn鈥檛 know the meaning of the word 鈥渃onform鈥� or got misled in some other way?

Reading researchers like Hugh Catts have been raising the that most reading comprehension exams are not well equipped to pinpoint the reasons behind a student鈥檚 literacy mistakes. NAEP could take the lead here by introducing other types of assessments that seek to unpack the root causes of reading struggles, and how they might differ across age groups. 

For example, young students might get a phonics check like the one England administers to its 6-year-olds. Older students might benefit from an age-appropriate version of this, as researchers have found that even middle and high school students can struggle with complex words.

3. Give states flexibility on English Language Arts assessments

Building on the point above, the federal government currently requires states to administer their own reading or language arts assessments annually in grades 3 to 8 and once in high school. Right now, the states have all interpreted that requirement to mean that they must give generic reading comprehension tests.

But states could be given flexibility to interpret this differently. Educators might gain better insights into students’ reading challenges if they were tested on discrete skills like decoding, fluency and vocabulary, and comprehension questions were left to specific content areas like social studies and science. Louisiana attempted something like this a few years ago, but the feds could give states much more leniency to pursue this line of inquiry.

4. Nudge states on accountability

Congressional leaders probably don鈥檛 have much appetite to rewrite the Every Student Succeeds Act, which requires states to draft goals for student achievement and plans for holding schools accountable. But those original state plans were written nearly a decade ago, and conditions have changed (for the worse) since then. The Department of Education can鈥檛 force states to revisit their plans if they don鈥檛 want to, but it could signal that it would be open to letting states amend them in light of the declines of the last decade, especially among the lowest-performing students.

5. Empower parents with information

Despite their best intentions, schools are not good at helping students who fall behind in reading catch up. According to the from Amplify鈥檚 DIBELS early literacy screener, just 49% of students who start kindergarten well behind in reading get on track by the end of third grade. And the odds get worse every year that schools wait. Last year, among third graders who were far behind at the beginning of the term, just 5% caught up by the end of the year.

Thanks to , parents already have access to their child鈥檚 education records, but only if they request them. To bring greater urgency to this issue, Congress could require schools to inform parents when their child is behind in reading and to work with families to develop specific improvement plans.

If reading scores are a crisis, policymakers should treat it accordingly. But they also have to be realistic in accepting that there鈥檚 only so much they can do, and that part of the decline in performance can be traced back to the fact that kids aren鈥檛 reading for pleasure as often as they used to 鈥� and are adults.

So one way to improve literacy scores is for education leaders at all levels to talk about the importance of reading. People who read a lot tend to know more about the world, and people who know more about the world tend to succeed in many aspects of life. That鈥檚 not exactly a policy change, but leadership can shape behavior to make knowledge 鈥� and reading 鈥� cool again. 

But they didn鈥檛 do anything to stop it. 

On Monday, Education Secretary Linda McMahon continued down that path, announcing that she鈥檒l hand over school safety and family engagement programs to the as part of her ongoing effort to 鈥渂reak up鈥� federal bureaucracy through interagency agreements.

鈥淏y leveraging HHS鈥檚 extensive emergency preparedness capabilities, we are creating a stronger foundation for supporting students and strengthening the safety of the school building,鈥� she said in a statement.

The move affects programs under the Office of Safe and Supportive Schools, including grants that help schools respond to traumatic events like school shootings and natural disasters. Full-Service Community Schools, Promise Neighborhoods, family engagement centers and Ready to Learn, which funds educational TV for preschoolers, are also part of that office.

Critics were quick to argue that the secretary is creating more complexity for schools and teachers. 鈥淣othing about this is better for kids,鈥� said Vito Borrello, executive director of the National Association for Family, School and Community Engagement. 鈥淚t’s inefficient. It’s chaotic.鈥� 

McMahon began transferring major education programs to other agencies last summer by moving career and technical education programs to the . She has told advocates for students with disabilities that 鈥渘othing shall remain鈥� at the department. The Labor Department will also assume responsibility for , including Title I, the department鈥檚 largest K-12 program. 

Democrats tried to insert binding language into the appropriations law that would stop McMahon from using these agreements to dismantle the agency. But Republicans balked. In a compromise, lawmakers attached a note calling for biweekly meetings with the department and saying they were worried that what McMahon is doing 鈥渨ill create inefficiencies, result in additional costs to the American taxpayer, and cause delays and administrative challenges.鈥�

At the time, Savannah Newhouse, a spokeswoman for the department, said officials aim to provide 鈥減roof of concept that interagency agreements provide the same protections, higher quality outcomes, and even more benefits for students, grantees and other education stakeholders.鈥� The next step, she added, is getting Congress to 鈥渃odify these partnerships.鈥�

Education advocates were relieved that Congress rejected drastic cuts to education programs proposed by President Donald Trump and House Republicans. But the question is 鈥渨hat happens to the funding and who is administering these programs,鈥� said Emily Merolli, a partner with the Sligo Law Group, and a former member of the department鈥檚 general counsel鈥檚 office.

A coalition of states and districts over mass layoffs at the department last year and amended their complaint to challenge the interagency agreements as well. But Merolli said the court may ultimately have to look at whether there have been any 鈥渄ownstream harms鈥� from offloading programs to different agencies.

Family advocates

The K-12 programs affected by this latest action have already seen disruption since President Donald Trump took office. 

Last May, the department grant, roughly $23 million that supported educational programming like Sesame Street and Reading Rainbow.  In September, the department canceled grants to five statewide family engagement centers serving six states. The centers each received $1 million annually to support districts in reaching underserved families. 

As with McMahon鈥檚 decision to cancel other grants and contracts, the centers were told their work was no longer a priority for this administration, which has aimed to eliminate programs promoting diversity, equity and inclusion.

Borrello decried the decision in his November newsletter, saying that schools can鈥檛 support families 鈥渨ithout a foundation of relational trust which is cultivated through honoring the diverse cultures and values of the families served. There is nothing controversial about this.鈥�

Then in December, McMahon canceled remaining Full-Service Community Schools grants, totaling $60 million, to 18 grantees. They included two grants, a combined $18.5 million, to ACT Now Illinois, a statewide afterschool provider network. The organization and has been in negotiations with the department over restoring the grants.

To respond to increases in students鈥� mental health needs, the 2,300-student Herrin school district in southern Illinois used the money to hire a social worker for each of its five schools. 

鈥淲e really need somebody to advocate not just for the students, but for the families as well,鈥� said Valerie Clodi, the district鈥檚 director of development. 

The district also on school supplies for students, free STEM-focused events for families and expanded career pathways programs. Schools saw drops in chronic absenteeism, Clodi said, and increases in performance among high schoolers on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, an assessment that the state accepts as an indicator of readiness for college. But after next week, the team of five family advocates will be down to one. An assistant who helped families who need housing or other resources also left. 

Clodi said she could see an overlap between HHS and community schools when it comes to focusing on students鈥� mental health. But 鈥渢hat’s just one pillar鈥� of the model, she said. 

Borrello called the move to HHS 鈥渢he best worst-case scenario鈥� and better than moving the programs to the Labor Department. But he noted that putting family engagement programs and K-12 under two separate agencies could undermine efforts to get parents more involved in their children鈥檚 education.

鈥淭his couldn’t come at a worse time,鈥� he said. 鈥淪cores are beginning to improve and now we do this.鈥� 

Their absences were excused, but still contributed to a chronic absenteeism problem that the district, like those across the country, has been trying to solve since the end of the pandemic. Some DeKalb students had as many as 25 visits to the doctor in a school year. Students are considered chronically absent when they have at least 18 absences, about 10% of the year.

鈥淭hey never would show up in our truancy dashboard because they might be great at turning in doctor’s notes,鈥� said Nicole Carroll, principal at Henagar Junior High School, east of Huntsville. 

Doctors are now more mindful of trying to schedule appointments around school hours, said Jason Mayfield, the district鈥檚 instructional supervisor. And it’s one of the reasons Alabama is closer than any other state to reducing chronic absenteeism back to pre-pandemic levels. 

鈥淲e really need to take a moon leap on attendance,鈥� state Superintendent last summer.聽鈥淲e need to see dramatic improvements, especially in our high poverty communities, so that we can get back to where we were before the pandemic and then work to get even better than that.鈥�

Statewide, 12% of students were chronically absent in 2024-25, six percentage points below the peak of 18% in 2022 and just a point higher than it was in 2018-19.

Other states still have a long way to go. 

New Mexico, where some districts to track absenteeism and alert parents when their kids are not in school, made for two straight years. But last year, the rate jumped again from 30% to 33%.聽Oregon, Alaska and the District of Columbia also still have rates above 30%, according to a maintained by the conservative American Enterprise Institute.聽

Progress is 鈥渁ll over the map,鈥� said Nat Malkus, AEI鈥檚 deputy director of education policy studies. It鈥檚 unlikely for states to see large declines in chronic absenteeism like some did after schools fully reopened, but the 鈥渄anger sign鈥� is that the pace of recovery is slowing, he said. States and districts are tackling the problem in different ways, but Malkus is among those who think the federal government should provide some leadership to keep schools moving in the right direction. 

鈥淭hey have a powerful megaphone and the nation鈥檚 data,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hey should be using both to push this fixable and pervasive issue to the top of the agenda, signaling to states, schools and families that getting kids back to class regularly is a non-negotiable priority for America鈥檚 schools.鈥�

Education Secretary Linda McMahon has voiced support for state efforts to improve reading performance 鈥� a top bipartisan goal considering historic drops in national test scores. But she hasn鈥檛 given the same attention to the persistent chronic absenteeism crisis. 

With 40 states and the District of Columbia reporting 2025 data so far, the rate stands at 23%, down a percentage point from the year before, but still well above the pre-pandemic level of 15%. A last summer showed that roughly half of urban districts are still battling rates . 

Both have committed to cutting chronic absenteeism in half over a five-year period. States vary in how they count attendance, but rates declined in 12 states participating in the challenge in 2025. In the other five and D.C., chronic absenteeism either increased or remained flat. 

A need for better data

There are emerging signs that chronic absenteeism is on the department鈥檚 radar. Its has held eight focus groups on the issue of chronic absenteeism since mid-December. The goal is to 鈥渋dentify and explore innovative strategies to address chronic absenteeism,鈥� said Savannah Newhouse, the department鈥檚 press secretary. 

The conversations focused on 鈥渞oot causes鈥� and effective strategies, said Hedy Chang, CEO of Attendance Works, a nonprofit that has brought national awareness to how high daily attendance rates can hide the fact that some students might be accumulating dozens of absences. A member of her team participated in one of the groups.

Malkus isn鈥檛 the only expert who would like to see the Trump administration step up. 

鈥淎t the end of the day, no instructional strategy or reform effort will work if students aren鈥檛 there to benefit from it,鈥� said Bella DiMarco, a senior policy analyst at , a think tank at Georgetown University. 

The federal government, she said, could improve the transparency and quality of data. While most states have posted their 2024-25 numbers, official federal reports are often a year or more behind. 鈥淪tates and districts need timely, actionable attendance data so they can intervene early, not reports that arrive too late to inform decisions.鈥�

The department could in turn encourage states to publish timely absenteeism data, like and already do, said Danyela Egorov, a fellow at the conservative . The secretary could also highlight strategies from districts that have been successful in bringing chronic absenteeism down, Egorov said.

The DeKalb schools in Alabama shifted from a punitive approach focused on truancy to one that encompasses excused absences as well. Leaders moved 鈥渆arly warning鈥� meetings with parents from the courthouse to schools to make them less threatening. 

Their 鈥淔lip the Dip鈥� campaign makes liberal use of attendance incentives for students and teachers, like gift cards and a Nintendo Switch. And every nine weeks, schools recognize kids for missing four days or fewer instead of celebrating only perfect attendance.

鈥淭hat way, they don’t just give up,鈥� said Carroll, Henagar Junior High鈥檚 principal. 

Since 2022, the district鈥檚 rate has dropped from over 19% to 10%.

鈥楪et them there first鈥�

Some say actions by the Trump administration are actually hurting educators鈥� efforts to lower chronic absenteeism, a data point that the to rate school performance.

In terminating government contracts, the department ended work on about聽effective ways to reduce chronic absenteeism.聽聽

鈥淭he team working on that had already sifted through over 2,000 studies on ways to address chronic absence and narrowed that to about 150 to 200,鈥� said Kevin Gee, a researcher at the University of California, Davis, who was among those on the project. 鈥淗ad it not been cancelled, the guide would have been made available for districts to use this month.鈥�

Immigration raids are leading parents to keep children home. In California鈥檚 Central Valley, enforcement action coincided with in daily absences, especially among young students, according to an analysis by Stanford University researcher Thomas Dee.  

Others point to McMahon鈥檚 decision in December to cut off 18 grantees that were still expecting at least two years of federal funding, comprising roughly $60 million, for . The model targets high-poverty areas and uses schools as hubs for a variety of services, from mentoring and mental health support to food banks and housing assistance. Recent research shows the approach has been linked to declines in chronic absenteeism in and . 

The Education Department is in negotiations with who sued over the loss of funds. But others wonder how they鈥檒l keep the work going. 

The Prichard Committee, a Kentucky nonprofit, was still expecting roughly $18 million to serve 40 districts when the department canceled the remainder of its grant. Schools that are part of the initiative have seen decreases in chronic absenteeism of at least 2%, higher than the rate of decline statewide. At Danville High School, southwest of Lexington, the rate fell from 45% in 2023-24 to 32% the next year. 

At Reidland Elementary in McCracken County, the funds paid for family literacy events and backpacks to incoming kindergartners stocked with early reading and math materials.

The grant also supported a teacher who works one-on-one with kindergartners who are behind in reading and math. But now, the principal will have to find another way to pay for the position. Lisa McKinney, communications director at Prichard, said it鈥檚 hard for students to overcome gaps if they鈥檙e missing too much school.

鈥淲e want everyone to read and write on grade level,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut you鈥檝e got to get them there first.鈥�

California Attorney General Rob Bonta Wednesday as part of an ongoing dispute over whether schools should proactively notify parents if their children change their gender identity.聽

The lawsuit comes in response to Education Secretary Linda McMahon’s聽a concluding that the state violated the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act and in her words, 鈥渆gregiously abused its authority by pressuring school officials to withhold information about students鈥� so-called 鈥榞ender transitions鈥� from their parents.”聽 Her letter cited a 2025 law that prohibits聽districts from forcing educators to 鈥渙ut鈥� students against their will.

The agency has threatened to revoke all of the state鈥檚 federal education funding, nearly $5 billion annually. But in the filing, Bonta said the department has “failed to demonstrate even a single violation of FERPA,” which gives parents the right to review education records. The potential loss of funding, he wrote, “presents an imminent and irreparable injury to California and infringes upon the state鈥檚 substantial interests.”

The Trump administration says California schools violated parents鈥� rights by pressuring schools to keep students鈥� gender transitions a secret.

In announced Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Education told state officials that they can resolve the dispute by treating any school 鈥済ender support plans鈥� as education records available for parents鈥� inspection and let districts enforce 鈥減ro-parental notification approaches.鈥�

鈥淯nder Gavin Newsom鈥檚 failed leadership, school personnel have even bragged about facilitating 鈥榞ender transitions,鈥� and shared strategies to target minors and conceal information about children from their own families,鈥� Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. The department referenced a public records request by a showing that six California districts changed the names or pronouns of 300 students in the 2023-24 school year. The announcement doesn鈥檛 spell out what penalties, if any, the state might face if it doesn鈥檛 comply.

But most student privacy experts say the department is misinterpreting the Federal Education Rights and Privacy Act. While FERPA gives parents the right to inspect their children鈥檚 education records, it doesn鈥檛 compel districts to notify a parent if their child changes their gender identity at school.

The department launched last March, based on a request from Julie Hamill, a conservative attorney who argued that state policies and guidance amounted to a 鈥渟cheme鈥� to conceal students鈥� gender identity from parents. Now an assistant U.S. attorney, Hamill cited a Q&A document, later rescinded, that to consult students before deciding whether to share information on their gender identity, including with their parents. Some districts, she wrote, would change students鈥� names and pronouns in school databases, but parents would see legal names when they logged in. 

Federal officials also took aim at a California law, passed in 2025, which says districts can鈥檛 force educators to 鈥渙ut鈥� students against their will. Liz Sanders, spokeswoman for the California Department of Education, said officials were reviewing the department’s findings and referred 社区黑料 to previous statements. In October, the the new law, known as the SAFETY Act, doesn鈥檛 prohibit school staff 鈥渇rom sharing any information with parents鈥� and doesn鈥檛 override FERPA. 

The department鈥檚 determination further escalates an ongoing, emotional debate between state leaders who say students have a right to privacy and an administration that holds such decisions are the responsibility of parents. Advocates for LGBTQ students and many educators say they鈥檙e trying to protect students who might face rejection or abuse at home. But others call such actions 鈥減arental exclusion鈥� policies that violate parents鈥� constitutional rights to direct the upbringing of their children. 

鈥淚f a student is contemplating life-altering changes, the least a school can do is notify their parent or guardian,鈥� McMahon .

Lydia McLaughlin, the parent whose experience Hamill cited in the letter to federal officials last January, called the news 鈥渂ittersweet.鈥� She seeking emails and schoolwork from the Hart Unified High School District, north of Los Angeles, that would demonstrate how school staff were socially transitioning her child from female to male. Administrators initially refused to meet with McLaughlin and cited a that protects trans students鈥� access to programs, sports and facilities that align with their gender identity. 

McLaughlin never filed a formal FERPA complaint with the Education Department鈥檚 Student Privacy Policy Office because she ultimately got the records she was seeking after threatening to sue the district. She told 社区黑料 last year that she believed a lot of the communication between staff members using the student鈥檚 preferred male name wasn鈥檛 in writing.

Now in college, her child identifies as a girl, 鈥渓oves feminine clothes again鈥� and has returned to ballet dancing after a five-year break.

鈥淚t’s been a long road to this moment,鈥� McLaughlin said. 鈥淚 only dreamed that there would be some sort of justice for what the school district did.鈥�

FERPA experts disagree with the department鈥檚 conclusion. Elana Zeide, a law professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, said officials didn鈥檛 point to a specific violation in which a parent was denied access to education records. And many districts still follow a legal precedent that doesn’t consider staff emails to be part of a student鈥檚 official record. 

鈥淵ou could not like these policies at all. You can be vehemently opposed to them,鈥� Zeide said. 鈥淏ut that doesn’t mean you can accuse the state of a violation when there aren鈥檛 the facts to support it .鈥�

But Lance Christensen, vice president of the conservative California Policy Center, called the department鈥檚 announcement. a 鈥渂ig deal.鈥�

鈥淲e’re thrilled that the federal government is finally taking federal law seriously and is interested in protecting the natural rights of parents,鈥� he said.

Jorge Reyes Salinas, a spokesman for Equality California, an LGBTQ advocacy group, called the decision 鈥減art of a broader, deliberate campaign to attack transgender young people and undermine their ability to learn and thrive in school.鈥�

Cases before the Supreme Court

The department鈥檚 demands come as the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether to hear three different cases, including one from California, focused on the same issues.

In a , U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez ruled in December in favor of two teachers from the Escondido Union School District, near San Diego, who said that requiring them to keep a student鈥檚 gender identity private violated their Christian faith. Parents later joined the lawsuit against the state. 

Benitez鈥檚 broad ruling said that California schools must prominently display wording that says parents 鈥渉ave a federal constitutional right to be informed if their public school student child expresses gender incongruence鈥� and that school staff also have a right to 鈥渁ccurately inform鈥� parents. 

Attorney General Rob Bonta appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which blocked the ruling. The teachers are now asking the Supreme Court to overrule the lower court, but the justices have not yet said whether they鈥檒l get involved. Florida, Montana and West Virginia filed a brief in support of the teachers and parents, saying the 鈥淐onstitution places the burden on states to respect fundamental rights, not on citizens to claw back the right to parent their own children.鈥�

But Bonta told the court that the consequences of compelling the disclosure of gender identity would be 鈥渋rreversible鈥� for many students. Benitez鈥檚 ruling, he said, would leave teachers and other school staff confused about what they can and can鈥檛 do.

The high court is also debating whether to hear two other cases in which parents allege that educators supported students鈥� gender identity changes at school without their knowledge. It takes only four justices to decide whether to hear a case. 

Jeff and January Littlejohn of Florida the Leon County district, alleging that Deeklake Middle School violated their rights by supporting their child鈥檚 gender transition from female to male behind their backs. 

Officials said educators were following guidance, which discourages 鈥渙uting鈥� LGBTQ students..

A federal district court dismissed the case. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit also ruled for the school system, saying that educators鈥� actions did not 鈥渟hock the conscience,鈥� in a legal sense.

鈥淒efendants did not act with intent to injure,鈥� the court said. 鈥淭o the contrary, they sought to help the child.鈥�

The First Circuit Court of Appeals issued a in Foote v. Ludlow School Committee. In that case, parents said staff at Baird Middle School in Ludlow, Massachusetts, concealed that their 11 year-old identified as genderqueer at school and was using a new preferred name. 

The three-judge panel wrote that while they sympathized with the parents鈥� desire for information about their children, the law doesn鈥檛 鈥渞equire governments to assist parents in exercising their fundamental right to direct the upbringing of their children.鈥�

These moves raise significant concerns that the federal government won鈥檛 be able to meet its legal obligations to students with disabilities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ().

Education Secretary Linda McMahon has numerous times that federal special education funding will continue flowing, no matter where the office and programs land within the government. But what she has not acknowledged 鈥� and what is troubling 鈥� is how moving the program to an agency like HHS inevitably shifts the focus of special ed from education to health care, thus pathologizing disabled students.

This is especially true considering HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has made about children with autism, calling them tragic and doubting their ability to lead full and meaningful lives. His statements indicate a belief that a medical diagnosis absolutely leads to tragic outcomes 鈥� which is simply untrue. 

Framing students with disabilities solely in medical terms hinders their potential for growth by narrowly confining them to a diagnosis and perceived limitations 鈥� resulting in low expectations in school. As recently as the , this allowed most states to exclude disabled students from academic assessments. Many schools encouraged their parents to keep their children at home on testing days.

Since then, the country has steadily moved away from low expectations for students with disabilities. Under the Biden administration, the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services issued specifically focused on setting a high bar for these children. The guidance included a focus on inclusive education practices to ensure students with disabilities have access to high-quality education with the opportunity to meet challenging goals. It also offered details about how states and districts could leverage federal funding to achieve those ends. 

Inclusive education practices are flexible and creative. Using such an approach, a team determining appropriate classroom settings during an Individualized Education Program meeting might decide that instead of placing a student in need of behavioral support in a segregated class of peers with disabilities, the student could be put in a general-education classroom, assisted by a paraprofessional or special education teacher. operates this way. Teachers or paraprofessionals accompany students with disabilities to general-education classes, providing behavioral and academic support in real time, innovatively and effectively meeting a child’s unique education needs. Instead of limiting children with disabilities, guidance and practices like these help students look to an expansive future. 

But between moving special education to HHS and the longer-term to convert IDEA grants into formula block grants, it will fall to the states to ensure that their special education laws and regulations are robust. IDEA includes minimum requirements for supporting disabled students. States can and should do more, including developing their own laws and guidance on issues like inclusion, challenging academic standards, teacher and service provider support and training, and requirements to provide services in an equitable manner to all students.

Families and advocates can work to hold states and districts accountable by, for example, pushing for state-level disaggregated reporting on timely provision of services, restrictive class and school placements, and disproportionate disciplinary practices. Additionally, states must work toward timely resolutions of and for any violations of disabled students鈥� civil rights. 

Leaving schools without timely access to federal funding to provide legally mandated services means students will unnecessarily struggle, and their lack of progress will be used as an indication of the failures of the current program. There have already been that shifts of education programs to other federal agencies have tied up resources in even more layers of bureaucracy. 

Shifting responsibility for specific IDEA and special education programs to HHS means that when states come looking for guidance, the staff with deep understanding of the interplay among civil rights, disability and education will no longer be available to help them. What guidance they do receive could be limited and unsupportive of students鈥� true intellectual, cognitive or physical capabilities.

Burying special education deep in the can only make things more difficult for children with disabilities. Finding essential services that families are desperate to reach will be like looking for a needle in a haystack. 

Last year marked the 50th anniversary of IDEA. What should be a time for celebrating milestones in increasing inclusivity and accessibility in America’s public schools has instead been fraught with fear and fights to retain the unique supports provided to disabled children through the Department of Education. It doesn鈥檛 have to be this way, and it shouldn鈥檛. 

Harold Hinds, is a civil rights attorney and Ph.D. student at the New School’s School for Public Engagement, also contributed to this essay.

The Department of Education granted the state to blend the funds from programs that support teacher quality, English learners, student enrichment and afterschool programs, a move that Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds said will shift 鈥渘early $8 million and thousands of hours of staff time from bureaucracy to actually putting that expertise and those resources in the classroom.鈥�

During an in western Iowa town of Denison, Education Secretary Linda McMahon called the move a 鈥済roundbreaking first step that gives state leaders more control over federal education dollars.鈥� 

The waiver, however, is not as expansive as what Reynolds, a Republican, originally floated when she announced the request in March. The funding flexibility only applies to the dollars the state manages, not federal funds going to districts, such as money for low-income students. 

Anne Hyslop, director of policy development at All4Ed, an advocacy group 鈥� and a former Education Department official 鈥� called the consolidation of funds for state activities 鈥渦nprecedented,鈥� but noted that the state scaled down after conversations with the department. 鈥淭his is not the seismic shift in federal funding that perhaps was first contemplated in their original draft.鈥�

The department also granted the state an , which releases districts from some requirements tied to federal programs and gives them more time to spend the money. But , both blue and red, already participate in that program.

The Iowa is one of six before the department. , for example, has asked for a similar block grant, while both Indiana and want to make changes to their accountability systems. Once McMahon grants one, it will be 鈥渉ard to say no to another state that shows up with the same asks,鈥� said Adam Schott, former acting assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education during the Biden administration.

  with the aim of reducing bureaucracy and giving states and districts more authority over spending has long been a Republican policy goal. Supporters argue that block grants are a more efficient way to address local issues and can reduce staff time spent on paperwork. But skeptics argue that the students whom Congress intended to help through specific programs could be shortchanged as states shift funds to other priorities. 

鈥淚 see how this could help to perhaps reduce redundancies, but at what expense?鈥� asked Melissa Peterson, legislative and policy director for the Iowa State Education Association, an affiliate of the National Education Association. 鈥淲e do have grave concerns that some of the various student populations may, quite frankly, not receive the services as intended.鈥� 

Republicans pushed for education block grants almost as soon as Congress established the Department of Education. In 1981, the Reagan administration in the Chapter 2 block grant. But Congress kept cutting funds for the program, and . 

In 1998, the House passed the Dollars to the Classroom Act, another block grant. Conservatives liked the 鈥減olitical symbolism of getting Washington out of what has traditionally been a state role,鈥� said Vic Klatt, who worked at the department during George H.W. Bush鈥檚 administration and then spent several years working on education policy for House Republicans. But no one, he said, ever wanted to get rid of the major programs, like Title I for high-poverty schools and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The bill died in the Senate.

鈥楾he data collection burden鈥�

Some school finance experts stress that the Every Student Succeeds Act, the primary education law, already offers a lot of flexibility to combine funds. But Catherine Pozniak, a consultant based in Louisiana who works with states on waiver requests, said agencies and districts still struggle to manage multiple programs. The 鈥済rievances鈥� that Iowa and Indiana have expressed are real, she said.

鈥淔lexibilities exist, but they are actually quite difficult to take advantage of,鈥� she said. 

While the department didn鈥檛 waive requirements related to data collection and reporting, McMahon wrote in to the state that 鈥渢he conversations between our staff have been informative and insightful regarding the data collection burden鈥� on states and districts.

Jim Blew, co-founder of the conservative Defense of Freedom Institute, called the announcement a “remarkable breakthrough” and said he hopes all states would try to follow Iowa’s example. “One of the most burdensome parts of dealing with the Education Department is the reporting,” he said. The agency “just needs time to think through how allowing it in one state will impact others, but I鈥檒l bet they are going to make that a priority.”

Schott challenged the argument that reporting how states are using federal funds is a waste of time.

 鈥淥ne person鈥檚 compliance is another person鈥檚 accountability, transparency and general prudent treatment of funds,鈥� he said. 鈥嬧�嬧�漈he reason you’ve got these discrete funding streams is not to make someone’s life difficult. It’s to make sure that marginalized student groups don’t have to fight and claw for the resources they’re going to need to access a high-quality education.鈥�

In her comments during the event, McKenzie Snow, Iowa鈥檚 education chief, talked about using the flexibility to better train teachers to serve the state鈥檚 growing English learner population, which has increased by 40% over the past decade, she said. But Hyslop said the state has yet to 鈥渕ake a compelling case鈥� for how the waiver would improve outcomes for those students.

For Snow, block grants are a familiar strategy. She served as an aide to former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos during Trump鈥檚 first administration. At the time, DeVos proposed  combining 29 programs into a $19.4 billion fund that would give states and districts more authority over how to spend the money. Democrats, who had control of the House at the time, didn鈥檛 support the idea, and e in both houses .

As Iowa鈥檚 chief, Snow asked the department to in the Perry Community School District following a 2024 at Perry High School that left two dead and six injured.

Schott said most of the waiver requests he received were due to similar tragedies or natural disasters that forced students to miss school. But he always urged states to work with regional education labs or other outside centers to evaluate how the changes they made affect students.

That will be more difficult, Hyslop said, due to the Trump administration鈥檚 efforts to downsize and shut down the Education Department.

鈥淭he department has fewer staff to monitor right now,鈥� she said. 鈥淯nderstanding the impact of this is going to be really challenging.鈥� 

鈥淭he money鈥檚 coming. The money’s not coming. Oh no, we have to shut all of our Head Starts. No we don’t,鈥� she said, describing the ping-ponging state leaders have been through between U.S. Secretary Linda McMahon鈥檚 efforts to downsize the department and court rulings reversing her actions. 鈥淲e’re going through total D.C. chaos right now. Every time you turn right, it says turn left.鈥�

To make sense of those shifts, she turns to Adam Schott, her associate secretary for student support and another top official at the Education Department during the Biden administration. In Washington, he oversaw the distribution of $122 billion in relief funds and was a primary point of contact on school improvement efforts. Having him on her team, Marten said, is like having 鈥減hone-a-friend on speed dial.鈥�

Schott is part of an exodus of former experts in federal policy, budgeting and data who have literally gone 鈥渂ack to the states,鈥� to borrow McMahon鈥檚 catch-phrase. In her eyes, the state level is where the magic happens, away from the one-size-fits-all ethos of Washington. The irony is that a recent crop of state officials are themselves federal ex-pats who resigned or were displaced by McMahon鈥檚 layoffs. 社区黑料 also spoke to former department staff working in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Illinois. Because of the secretary鈥檚 efforts to shutter the department, there have never been so many federal staffers looking for work. 

With the future of the federal government鈥檚 role in education uncertain, observers say their expertise is more valuable than ever. 

鈥淭he people I worked with were there for like 15, 20 years,鈥� said Kiara Nerenberg, a top data expert who resigned from her position with the National Center for Education Statistics just ahead of the mass layoffs in March. 鈥淭here’s just so much knowledge that’s now looking for a place to land.鈥�

Maryland鈥檚 鈥榖iggest score鈥� 

Marten鈥檚 team in Delaware also includes , who served as acting secretary at the department before McMahon was confirmed and has decades of experience in the federal government. 

Marten called her 鈥渢he right hand and the left hand鈥� of multiple secretaries, including Democrat Arne Duncan and Republican Betsy DeVos. Carter stepped into the role of acting chief operating officer for Federal Student Aid last year following after a disastrous launch of the redesigned financial aid form. She oversaw corrections that contributed to a this year. Carter resigned in April and is now helping to overhaul Delaware’s outdated school funding formula.

But Marten didn鈥檛 get all the talent. Because of its proximity to Washington, Maryland has scooped up several former staffers. Montgomery County even launched targeting displaced federal employees.

Richard Kincaid leads the division of college and career pathways at the Maryland State Department of Education. His 鈥渂iggest score,鈥� he said, was hiring Nerenberg, the former NCES staffer. One of her responsibilities was making 鈥渁ll of the tens and hundreds of thousands of points on maps that tell you where schools are,鈥� she said. She was part of to identify neighborhood demographics 鈥� vital information for programs like Title I for low-income schools and grants for rural areas.聽

Now, she gathers data for career and technical education programs, but is also working to better align career-focused education with the needs of local labor markets. Having Nerenberg 鈥渃atapulted us years ahead,鈥� Kincaid said.聽

Others searching for new jobs traveled far outside Washington. 

Tara Lawley spent 17 years with NCES, where she worked on both higher education and K-12 data collection. She was laid off along with over 1,300 other staff at the department in March while her husband, who worked in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, took the 鈥渇ork in the road鈥� option, a deferred resignation with several months of paid leave.

In August, she found her new position with the Illinois Board of Higher Education, where she鈥檚 the managing director of policy, research and fiscal analysis.

鈥淲e sold our house, tore our children out of everything they knew, and moved them across the country,鈥� she said.

Her kids, 5 and 8, are doing fine, she said. But the experience reinforced her view that some decisions shouldn鈥檛 be left up to the states. 

鈥淗ow do you take a [special education plan] from one state to another? That’s a challenge that still exists and it’s certainly not going to be solved if you do it state by state,鈥� she said. 鈥淚f you鈥檙e in a state that’s really not doing well in K-12 education and you move to a different state, your kid can be really far behind.鈥�

鈥楥onnective tissue鈥�

Some former staffers have branched out into agencies that focus on more than just education.

Sarah Mehrotra spent two years in the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, where she administered pandemic recovery efforts like curbing chronic absenteeism and preventing students from becoming homeless. She left the department in January along with other members of Cardona鈥檚 team, but knew she wanted to keep doing similar work.

Now she鈥檚 part of Maryland Gov. Wes Moore鈥檚 Office for Children, where she works on an initiative to in specific communities. They include Frederick County鈥檚 , where more than 80% of students in two elementary schools qualify for free or reduced-price lunch, and Baltimore鈥檚 Cherry Hill neighborhood, where a state grant supports a .

When she was with the department, she said officials were 鈥渟creaming from the rooftops鈥� about ways districts could blend federal dollars with other sources of funding to re-engage students who became disconnected from school during the pandemic. Now, she said, “It’s super helpful to have the federal, state and local perspective” when working with grantees at the community level.

Those with federal experience, she said, can serve as 鈥渃onnective tissue鈥� between states and the Education Department. 

Republicans say there should be fewer ties to Washington, not more. At least one former department official, now at the state level, agrees. McKenzie Snow, Iowa鈥檚 education director, worked as an aide to DeVos and held top education positions in New Hampshire and Virginia. 

She鈥檚 among those who, like McMahon, say that states are well equipped to manage federal education funds without the department鈥檚 strict oversight. Her state was the first to submit to roll federal funds into a block grant.

鈥楾heir own innovation鈥�

McMahon often points to reading gains in Mississippi and Louisiana to argue that the department is unnecessary. 

鈥淭he states that are making great progress 鈥� it鈥檚 through their own innovation,鈥� she said during a recent . 鈥淚t’s not coming from the Department of Education.鈥�

But not all states have seen the same progress, and many have experienced significant turnover in leadership since the pandemic, which can contribute to disruption across an agency. Just the state chiefs changed in Florida, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oklahoma and Utah, and since the beginning of 2023, more than 30 states have changed superintendents. 

Having staff with some knowledge of federal grants and requirements is a plus right now, said Anna Edwards, co-founder and chief advocacy officer at Whiteboard Advisors, a consulting group. 

鈥淕iven the uncertainty at the federal level, having those answers in house within a state is valuable,鈥� she said. 鈥淒uring the shutdown, leaders couldn’t even talk to anyone at the department.鈥�

Elizabeth Ross, who served in the department during the , has worked for three chiefs since joining the D.C. Office of the State Superintendent of Education in 2020. 

鈥淚t’s our job to make sure that students don’t feel that transition, that they continue to have access to all of the resources and support,鈥� she said. 

A former third grade teacher in D.C., she led federal efforts to turn around low-performing schools and revamp No Child Left Behind, with its tough testing and accountability requirements, into the more-flexible Every Student Succeeds Act. 

Under Secretary Duncan, the department used stimulus funds as leverage to get states to adopt the Common Core standards and incorporate student test scores into teacher evaluations. The incentives often drew complaints about government overreach, but they also 鈥渃atalyzed and generated a lot of reform,鈥� she said. 

What she didn鈥檛 have was frequent contact with teachers and parents directly affected by those programs. Now an assistant superintendent, she spends a lot of time in schools and often runs into teachers in the community who ask about specific curriculum materials.

She has new appreciation for their input. 

鈥淢y perspective has shifted, compared to when I was at the federal level, on how important local buy-in is for the success of policies,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t’s something that I understand in a much, much deeper way.鈥�

While the federal education bureaucracy has room for improvement, this move should alarm anyone 鈥� across party lines 鈥� who understands the central purpose of Title I: to mitigate the effects of poverty on learning and ensure that every child has a fair chance at a high-quality education.

Title I was not created to build workforce pipelines or meet short-term labor market needs. It was created to address inequities in schooling. Relocating it to the Department of Labor 鈥� an agency with little experience in K-12 education, little familiarity with school improvement or academic intervention, and no core mission related to teaching or learning 鈥� fundamentally undermines its purpose.

Title I administration relies on specialists who spend their careers understanding the complexities of school improvement, early literacy, bilingual education, assessment, family engagement, data reporting and civil rights enforcement. These professionals interpret federal law, develop guidance that districts depend on, monitor state implementation, help local leaders navigate compliance challenges and support research-based strategies that improve academic outcomes for children in poverty. Their work is rarely visible to the public, but their expertise is vital to the day-to-day functioning of thousands of schools.

When these positions are eliminated or scattered across agencies, the federal government loses not only staff but decades of institutional memory. Labor does not have personnel trained to advise districts on effective reading interventions, to monitor support for English learners, or to help states build equitable accountability systems.

Nor does it have the infrastructure to provide guidance on the complex interdependence of Title I with federal programs governing students with disabilities, teacher training or English learners. That expertise cannot be rebuilt quickly. And the predictable result will be confusion, inconsistency and weaker oversight.

Narrowing the federal role to workforce preparation overlooks the broader civic, academic, social and developmental purposes of schooling. A child鈥檚 education is not simply a supply-chain function of the labor market. Title I was created to provide additional resources to schools serving students with the fewest opportunities: resources that fund literacy coaches, paraprofessionals, after-school tutoring, community school coordinators, summer learning programs, bilingual aides and social workers.

These efforts help children succeed academically and thrive as full members of their communities. They cannot be replaced by job-readiness activities, nor should they be justified only through workforce logic.

The students most harmed by this shift live in every corner of the country. In rural communities, Title I dollars support small schools that would otherwise be unable to hire reading specialists or maintain adequate transportation. These schools often have only one or two central-office staff members to manage federal programs. When reporting requirements or compliance expectations shift suddenly to a new agency unfamiliar with school operations, rural districts have little capacity to absorb the confusion. That leaves teachers and students vulnerable.

In suburban districts, Title I is often the lifeline that enables supports for rapidly changing demographics. Many suburban schools now serve increasing numbers of multilingual learners, low-income families and students experiencing housing instability. Title I funds help these districts build systems of early intervention, family engagement and academic support that would otherwise not exist. When federal guidance becomes unclear or inconsistent, these districts struggle to maintain those programs.

Urban districts depend on Title I at an even larger scale. Large-city schools use these funds to support community school models, mental health services, after-school programs, restorative justice initiatives and partnerships with nonprofits. They also rely on clear federal guidance to ensure that high-poverty schools receive their fair allocation of state and local funds in addition to Title I dollars, a safeguard called 鈥渟upplement, not supplant.鈥� Because Labor lacks the expertise or commitment to enforce this rule, inequities within districts will widen and children in red, purple and blue districts will suffer.

As a child of a low-income, single-parent family, my brother and I benefited directly from Title I funding in the 13 public schools we attended. Title I paid for more teachers, for literacy programs, books in our classrooms, after-school programs, breakfast, free and reduced-price lunch and even band instruments that allowed us to participate until we could afford to purchase our own.

Both of us entered the workforce at young ages, taking part time jobs in middle and high school. Both of us continued to work through college. And both of us have Title I to thank for providing funding and accountability mechanisms to the local districts we attended. Despite the financial instability and numerous moves, public schools and the educators serving in them offered us resources, programs and stability we otherwise would not have experienced.

Those advocating for the elimination of the Education Department insist that because Title I funding will continue, nothing fundamental will change. But funding without coherent and responsible oversight is functionally weaker funding.

Dollars do not implement themselves.

They require an expert federal partner, capable state agencies and local leaders who understand how to use those funds wisely. When the federal partner is replaced by an agency without educational expertise, the quality and equity of implementation deteriorate. That deterioration will disproportionately impact the very communities and families Title I was created to support.

Improving the federal role in education is a worthy goal. Streamlining bureaucracy, clarifying guidance and eliminating redundancies can make federal programs more effective. But dispersing the Education Department鈥檚 core functions across agencies that lack expertise is not reform, it鈥檚 abandonment. The nation鈥檚 commitment to public schooling as the foundation for increasing educational access and economic opportunity is too important to place in the hands of a department ill-equipped to uphold it.

Those resources apparently include the more than 250 OCR employees that Education Secretary Linda McMahon has been trying to fire since March. 

Three weeks after Richey was sworn in, the department is telling laid-off staff to report by Dec. 15 to temporarily work through a backlog of civil rights complaints, according to an email sent out Friday. 

In a Monday statement, Rachel Gittleman, president of the American Federation of Government Employees Local 252, which represents department staff, said she鈥檚 鈥渞elieved these public servants are finally being allowed to return to work鈥� and that keeping them sidelined has 鈥渨asted more than $40 million in taxpayer funds.鈥� She accused McMahon of playing politics. 鈥淒epartment leadership allowed a massive backlog of civil rights complaints to grow, and now expects these same employees to clean up a crisis entirely of the Department鈥檚 own making.鈥�

OCR has complaints to work through. In federal court updates as part of over the cuts, officials said that they were dismissing the majority of the complaints filed since the March layoffs. shows that staff have resolved 165 cases this year, but that鈥檚 well below previous years. 

The call back to work is the latest twist in a legal saga that has been a rollercoaster both for OCR employees and families waiting for action on their complaints. In October, a allowed the department to move forward with the layoffs as the lawsuit challenging them continues. Now, with the possibility that they could still ultimately lose their jobs, the attorneys, investigators and other OCR staff members must get back to work. 

鈥淭he department will continue to appeal the persistent and unceasing litigation disputes concerning the reductions in force,鈥� Julie Hartman, press secretary for legal affairs, said in a statement. 鈥淏ut in the meantime, it will utilize all employees currently being compensated by American taxpayers.鈥�

鈥楧rastically reduced staffing鈥櫬�

The department鈥檚 admission that it needs help to carry out its legal obligations is at least the third time officials have recalled staff after eliminating them. In May, a House appropriations subcommittee that she had rehired 74 people. 

鈥淵ou hope that you鈥檙e just cutting fat,鈥� McMahon testified. 鈥淪ometimes you cut a little in the muscle.鈥� 

In August, the department brought back employees, placed on leave in late January. Many had on diversity, equity and inclusion during the first Trump administration, an activity that made them a target for the administration鈥檚 aggressive anti-DEI agenda. While the union filed for arbitration to challenge the firings, Madison Biederman, a spokeswoman for the department said the staffers were recalled because 鈥渢he agency determined they are an asset to the workforce.鈥� 

Last week鈥檚 development is further evidence that 鈥渢he federal government cannot fulfill its civil rights mandate to students with such drastically reduced staffing,鈥� said Amanda Walsh, deputy director of external affairs for the Victim Rights Law Center, a legal advocacy group that sued over the cuts to OCR. The organization represents victims of sexual assault. 鈥淲e have not had any movement on our cases nor have we even heard where they鈥檝e been assigned, demonstrating that the caseloads are too big for the reduced staff to manage.鈥�

In March, the department shuttered seven of the 12 OCR regional offices, and during the government shutdown, tried to lay off another 137 OCR staffers. A the layoffs, and the agreement to reopen the government forced the secretary to bring the employees back to work, at least until the end of January.聽

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, opened doors that were once firmly shut for students with disabilities.

As we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the IDEA, we reflect on how far we鈥檝e come, and the work yet to do, to protect students with disabilities.

— U.S. Department of Education (@usedgov)

One advocate for students with disabilities, whose cases make up the bulk of OCR鈥檚 work, suggested that Richey has contributed to the sense that 鈥渢hings are moving forward.鈥�

Callie Oettinger, who publishes , a blog, highlighted Richey鈥檚 recent marking the 50th anniversary of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Along with leading OCR, Richey is serving as acting assistant secretary for the office that oversees special education. Both offices, she said in an accompanying video, are 鈥渃ommitted to vigorous enforcement.鈥�

鈥淭his is not the language of an agency sunsetting a program,鈥� Oettinger wrote. She told 社区黑料 she found Richey鈥檚 video 鈥渁 breath of fresh air, passionate and positive.鈥� 

The department did not say whether recalling the staff was Richey鈥檚 idea. But one current OCR staff member, who asked to remain anonymous to avoid retribution, said 鈥渟he seems interested in us doing our work.”

But it took months for some states to access millions of dollars for career and technical education this year after the Department of Labor , part of the Trump administration鈥檚 plan to splinter and ultimately dismantle the Department of Education. The Labor Department鈥檚 grant system didn鈥檛 recognize state education agencies鈥� bank accounts. 

鈥淲e were in this endless loop of having to re-verify our account number,鈥� said Richard Kincaid, assistant state superintendent of college and career pathways at the Maryland State Department of Education. 鈥淚t never seemed to take in the system.鈥�

Maryland used state funds to fill the gap while it waited on $22 million in reimbursements. But the glitch, some argue, doesn鈥檛 bode well for when the Labor Department begins dispersing funds from Title I, the largest federal education program. The annual budget for Title I is $18 billion, compared to $1.4 billion for , which funds CTE. Title I serves 26 million low-income students, covering salaries, tutoring programs and classroom materials. 

An , obtained by the website Government Executive, underscored the difficulties, calling the shift of CTE a 鈥渕iniscule鈥� task compared to what lies ahead. 鈥淟arger formula grants and competitive grants are going to be much more difficult to migrate,鈥� the document said.

Beyond technical difficulties, educators say the Labor and Education departments have such vastly different missions that they worry about the message the Trump administration is sending by putting K-12 programs in an agency focused on getting jobless adults into the workforce. 

鈥淲e’re not talking about how to support a 28-year-old walking into an American job center looking for the next thing,鈥� Kinkaid said. 鈥淲e’re talking about kids.鈥� 

The Education Department last week unveiled six interagency agreements with four other federal agencies as part of the Trump administration鈥檚 plan to wind down an agency that it argues was unconstitutional to begin with. 

鈥淟et’s make sure that that grant money that’s coming from the federal government is getting in [states鈥橾 hands as efficiently as possible,鈥� Education Secretary Linda McMahon said during a White House briefing Thursday. 鈥淲e don’t want teachers having to spend their time and money on regulatory compliance.鈥� 

But for some state directors like Kinkaid, the result has been frustrating.

The administration, he said, has 鈥渁sked state CTE programs to essentially fly for the past six months without air traffic control.”

鈥楩ruitful partnership鈥�

Officials downplayed the initial rough spots, saying the transition of CTE, adult education and family literacy programs to the Labor Department has been relatively smooth. They worked with nine states to resolve the account number problem. During a call with reporters Tuesday, a senior department official said the administration expects a 鈥渟imilar fruitful partnership鈥� when it merges other K-12 programs into the Labor Department.

State leaders, the official promised, would still be able to rely on 鈥渢he expertise and concierge-level service鈥� they expect. As of Thursday, staff housed in the Labor Department had processed 568 payment requests totaling over $227 million for 40 unique states and territories, according to an email from a Labor official.

But at least one state, Rhode Island, was still hitting roadblocks as of Friday.

鈥淲e are receiving error messages indicating that our organization name does not match the name on record,鈥� said Rhode Island Department of Education spokesman Victor Morente. He said he expected the issue to be fixed this week. 鈥淭his situation underscores the challenges that abrupt changes within federal departments can create.鈥�

Lawmakers heard about the rocky start last week.

鈥淥perationally, it is a muddle,鈥� Braden Goetz told the . He spent 26 years in the Office of Career, Technical and Adult Education and now works as a senior policy advisor at New America, a left-leaning think tank. 鈥淚 don’t understand how the work gets done. When Secretary McMahon makes decisions, does she call the Secretary of Labor and ask her to communicate that down the chain?鈥�

An Education Department spokesperson said staff reached out to all grantees about requesting CTE funds from the new grant system and has yet to hear from five of them. 

鈥淚t is common for states to not draw down funds for several months for a variety of state-driven reasons,鈥� the official said. The California, Michigan and Wyoming education departments told 社区黑料 they haven鈥檛 had any trouble getting their CTE funds.

鈥楤ureaucracy will remain鈥�

John Pallasch served as assistant secretary of the Employment and Training Administration, the Labor office to which K-12 programs are moving, during Trump鈥檚 first term. He said any hiccups are likely to be temporary and that the Labor Department 鈥渋s pretty good at grants management.鈥� 

Some observers said shuffling staff and programs from one agency to another doesn鈥檛 go far enough. 

鈥淭he Education Department still retains many functions,鈥� Neal McCluskey, director of the Center for Educational Freedom at the libertarian Cato Institute, wrote in . 鈥淪o bureaucracy will remain, and the Constitution will continue to be violated.鈥�

From Kinkaid鈥檚 perspective in Maryland, states have lost the strong working relationship they had with CTE staff at the Education Department. The team is down from 15 staffers to about five. There鈥檚 been 鈥渓ittle to no communication since the movement happened,鈥� he said. In addition, a lot of state CTE directors are relatively new and need guidance on how to comply with regulations, said Amy Loyd, former assistant secretary for the CTE and adult education office during the Biden administration.

The Employment and Training Administration manages about $3 to $4 billion in grants annually 鈥� a fraction of the $28 billion the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education administers.

In a , Angela Hanks, acting assistant secretary of that division from 2021 to 2022, described moving K-12 programs into the office like 鈥渉aving a frog carry a camel on its back.鈥�

A few of the office鈥檚 existing grants focus on youth, but those target teens and young adults who fit 鈥渜uite a different profile from the students who are served by Title I,鈥� Hanks, now at the left-leaning Century Foundation, told 社区黑料. Job Corps helps 16- to 24-year-olds find employment, while teaches vocational skills for 鈥渋n-demand industries鈥� like construction and hospitality. 

Loyd, now CEO at All4Ed, an advocacy organization, sees a similar mismatch with moving adult education programs to the Labor Department.

鈥淢any of these older adults came to adult education services to strengthen their own literacy because they 鈥� want to be able to help their grandkids with homework,鈥� she said. 鈥淭hey’re 72; they don’t want a workforce credential. They want to be better readers so they can read to their grandkids.鈥� 

Several of the federal K-12 grants are complicated and depend on calculations year to year to ensure payments to districts are accurate. , for example, requires annual counts of military-connected students who attend schools on or near bases.

鈥淭he suggestion that these programs are on autopilot and [the Education Department] just flips a switch to flow the money to states and districts is a fundamental misunderstanding,鈥� said Danny Carlson, who served as deputy assistant secretary of policy and programs in the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education during the Biden administration. He鈥檚 now executive director of Learning First Alliance, a network that includes administrator associations, teachers unions and the National PTA.

In addition, McMahon tried to lay off 132 of the 185 remaining elementary and secondary employees during the shutdown. A the layoffs, and the agreement to reopen the government forced the secretary to bring the employees back to work, at least until the end of January. But it鈥檚 unclear whether she plans to try to terminate them again. 

After 10 months of canceled grants, temporary funding freezes and other disruptions, some district leaders are growing accustomed to the uncertainty. 

鈥淚 expect Labor will have a hard time managing Title I allocations for next year, but the administration is trying to do that,鈥� said Jeremy Vidito, chief financial officer for the Detroit Public Schools. 鈥淭hey want the system to fail so they can 鈥� shift funds to private schools or just give the money back to taxpayers.鈥�

Pallasch, the former assistant labor secretary, said he supports integrating not just CTE, but all education programs into the Labor Department.

鈥淲e’re all pulling in the same direction,鈥� he said. 鈥淲hether we’re talking K-12, community college or, quite frankly, Harvard and Yale, those are just job training programs. We are training folks to have the skills to be able to function in an organization.鈥� 

But Kinkaid and fear that the move to the Labor Department takes the field back to a time when some students were 鈥渢racked鈥� into vocational courses without rigorous academic content. 

There are growing efforts to expand apprenticeships and other opportunities for students who might not want to go to college. But for decades, Kinkaid said, the CTE field has tried to 鈥渟hrug off鈥� the stigma that career-focused instruction was only for lower-performing students.

鈥淲e may intentionally or unintentionally recreate that old system where low-income students and students of color were funneled into limited, low-mobility job paths,鈥� he said. 鈥淭his is exactly what the modern CTE system was designed to prevent.鈥�

The Department of Labor will 鈥渃o-manage鈥� the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education by administering roughly $28 billion in grant funds through an interagency agreement. The Interior Department will take responsibility for Indian education. 

Decisions are still pending on whether to move the offices overseeing civil rights, special education and student loans, but additional agreements move the Office of Postsecondary Education to the Department of Labor and a campus-based child care program to the Department of Health and Human Services.

Federal education officials celebrated the announcement as a key milestone toward fulfilling President Donald Trump鈥檚 March executive order to dismantle the department and said state leaders could still expect 鈥渃oncierge-level service.鈥� 

鈥淎t the end of the day, it means more dollars to the classroom, to the grantees, that does not get siphoned off through bureaucracy,鈥� a senior department official said during a background call with reporters. 鈥淲e think that this really does give states more power to 鈥� determine how those dollars are spent and to best best manage them.鈥�

In a subsequent online presentation involving the White House, some education advocates sent thumbs down and sad face emojis as the call concluded.

Rebecca Sibilia, executive director of EdFund, a think tank, said she was concerned that they made no mention of what will happen to the Institute for Education Sciences. The department鈥檚 research arm was one of the Department of Government Efficiency鈥檚 first targets. It canceled roughly $900 million in grants, and McMahon laid off most of the staff in March.

鈥淚f there is any fundamental role for the government to play, it is the collection and reporting of data,鈥� she said. 鈥淎s for the rest of the plan, it sounds like they have spread these programs so far and wide it will be difficult to put Humpty Dumpty back together again鈥�. 

The administration has plowed ahead with dismantling the department despite McMahon鈥檚 frequent acknowledgement that only Congress, which established the agency in 1979, has the power to completely eliminate it. She has the agency鈥檚 role, describing it as a 鈥減ass-through鈥� for federal funds and used social media to minimize the department鈥檚 work. 鈥淢akes you wonder…do we really need at all?,鈥� she after the government re-opened.

In October, she finished career and technical programs, adult education and family literacy to the Department of Labor. During the government shutdown, officials said they were 鈥渆xploring partnerships鈥� with the Department of Health and Human Services to take over special education. In higher education, the department is considering whether to its $1.77 trillion student loan portfolio to private companies. Like other aspects of the president鈥檚 plan, it鈥檚 unclear whether such moves would be legal.

鈥楽udden, chaotic decisions鈥�

Under that created the agency, the secretary can reorganize the department and enter into interagency agreements. 

Speaking to reporters, the department official cited the , a 1933 law that she said gives the agency the right to 鈥渃ontract with other federal agencies to procure services.鈥� 

鈥淚nteragency agreements are a frequently used tool of the federal government,鈥� the official said, adding that because the Labor Department already oversees workforce development programs, it鈥檚 best positioned to manage funding focused on helping students prepare for the workforce. 

But Emily Merolli, a partner with the Sligo Law Group, and a former member of the department鈥檚 general counsel鈥檚 office, said the administration鈥檚 actions 鈥渁re not legally supportable.鈥�

The law 鈥渁bsolutely does not grant the secretary the authority to just transfer those actual functions 鈥� let alone entire offices 鈥� to another agency,鈥� she said. 鈥淒ressing this up as a 鈥榗o-management or 鈥榩artnership鈥� agreement doesn’t make it legal. They’re trying to dress up the pig, but it’s still an illegal pig.鈥�

In a statement, the Council of Chief State School Officers said they seek assurances that the department won鈥檛聽miss deadlines and that funding 鈥渇lows without interruption to support students.鈥澛�

But individually, some state education leaders condemned the day鈥檚 events.

鈥淭his decision is the latest in a long pattern of sudden, chaotic decisions at the federal level that have created widespread anxiety and confusion,鈥� Rhode Island education Commissioner Ang茅lica Infante Green said in a statement.

California state Superintendent Tony Thurmond said, 鈥淚t is clearly less efficient for state departments of education and local school districts to work with four different federal agencies instead of one.鈥�

Opponents say eliminating the department leaves the most vulnerable students without important protections because other agencies lack expertise to administer complex laws like the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.  

Multiple surveys, including one from and another from PDK International, show the public is largely opposed to the idea. But from Yes. Every Kid. Foundation, a school choice advocacy group, found that respondents were more positive when they were told that K-12 funding, like Title I for high-poverty schools, would be preserved. 

Some conservatives say the government should phase out the Title I program along with the department and hand the $18 billion annually over to states for private school choice. 

鈥淭he money has been spent for more than 50 years and it hasn’t accomplished much,鈥� said Ray Domanico, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. 鈥淥ne of the things we’ve learned is that Washington is not the place to dictate policy.鈥�

A showed that Black students in high-poverty, high-minority schools made greater gains in reading when their schools used Title I to reduce class sizes. When schools used the funds for teacher training, Black and Latino students made greater gains in math. But and are getting larger between high- and low-achieving students.

But Domanico is skeptical that the Republicans will be able to finish the job of eliminating the department. A lot depends on whether the Democrats take control of the House in next year鈥檚 midterm elections, and 鈥榠n two years,鈥� he said, 鈥淭rump is going to be a lame duck.鈥澛�

Others think that advocates are overreacting to the news. Michael Petrilli, president of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute, and a former department official during the second Bush administration, dismissed the announcement as 鈥渁 nothing burger.鈥�

鈥淭hey will move some boxes (and people) around,鈥� , 鈥渁nd, if a Democrat wins in 2028, it will be swiftly undone.鈥�

When six Southern public university systems this summer formed a new accreditation agency, the move shook the national evaluation model that higher education has relied on for decades.

The news wasn鈥檛 unexpected: It arrived a few months after President Donald Trump issued an in April overhauling the nation鈥檚 accreditation system by, among other things, barring accreditors from using college diversity mandates. It also came after U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon in May for universities to switch accreditors.

The accreditation process, often bureaucratic, cumbersome and time consuming, is critical to the survival of institutions of higher education. Colleges and their individual departments must undergo outside reviews 鈥� usually every few years 鈥� to prove that they meet certain educational and financial standards. If a school is not accredited, its students cannot receive federal aid such as Pell grants and student loans.

Some accreditation agencies acknowledge the process needs to evolve. But critics say the Trump administration is reshaping accreditation for political reasons, and risks undermining the legitimacy of the degrees colleges and universities award to students.

Trump said during his campaign that he would wield college accreditation as a 鈥渟ecret weapon鈥� to root out DEI and other 鈥渨oke鈥� ideas from higher education. He has made good on that pledge.

Over the summer, for example, the administration sent letters to the accreditors of both Columbia and Harvard universities, alleging that the schools had violated federal civil rights law, and thus their accreditation rules, by failing to prevent the harassment of Jewish students after Hamas鈥� Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack on Israel.

The administration鈥檚 antipathy toward DEI has prompted some accreditors to remove diversity requirements. The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business, for instance, from its guiding principles earlier this year. Under White House pressure, the American Bar Association this year suspended enforcement of its DEI standards for its accreditation of law schools and has extended that suspension into next year.

But state legislatures laid the groundwork for public university accreditation changes even before Trump returned to the White House.

In 2022, Florida enacted a requiring the state鈥檚 public institutions to switch accreditors every cycle 鈥� usually every few years 鈥� forcing them to move away from the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, known as SACSCOC.

North Carolina , with a law prohibiting the 16 universities within the University of North Carolina system and the state鈥檚 community colleges from receiving accreditation from the same agency for consecutive cycles.

Then, the consortium of six Southern university systems this summer launched its new accreditation agency, called the Commission for Public Higher Education. The participating states include Florida and North Carolina, along with Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas.

Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis in a news release that the commission will 鈥渂reak the ideological stronghold鈥� that other accreditation agencies have on higher education. Speaking at Florida Atlantic University, he the new organization will 鈥渦pend the monopoly of the woke accreditation cartels.鈥�

鈥淲e care about student achievement; we care about measurable outcomes; we care about efficiency; we care about pursuing truth; we care about preparing our students to be citizens of our republic,鈥� DeSantis said.

Jan Friis, senior vice president for government affairs at the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, which represents accrediting agencies, said the century-old system is in the midst of its most significant changes since the federal government tied accreditation to student aid after World War II.

鈥淚f the student picks a school that鈥檚 not accredited by a recognized accreditor, they can鈥檛 spend any federal aid there,鈥� Friis said. 鈥淎ccreditation has become the 鈥榞ood housekeeping seal of approval.鈥欌��

What鈥檚 next for the new accreditor

Dan Harrison, who is leading the startup phase of the Commission for Public Higher Education, described accreditation as 鈥渢he plumbing of the whole higher ed infrastructure.鈥�

鈥淚t鈥檚 not dramatic. It鈥檚 not meant to be partisan. But it鈥檚 critical to how schools function,鈥� said Harrison, who is the University of North Carolina System鈥檚 vice president for academic affairs.

Though the founding schools of the new commission are all in the South, Harrison said, he expects accreditation to shift away from the long-standing geography-based model. In the past, universities in the South were accredited by SACSCOC simply because of location. In the future, he said, public universities across the country might instead be grouped together because they share similar governance structures, funding constraints and oversight.

鈥淚n 2025, if you were designing accreditation from scratch, you wouldn鈥檛 build it around geography,鈥� Harrison said. 鈥淧ublic universities have more in common with each other across states than they do with private or for-profit institutions in their own backyard.鈥�

The Commission for Public Higher Education opened with an initial cohort capped at 10 institutions within the first six states. Harrison said that based on the interest, the group could have accepted 15 to 20.

鈥淚 thought we鈥檇 be at six or seven. We reached 10 quickly and across a wider range of institutions than expected,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e already have an applicant outside the founding systems. That鈥檚 well ahead of where I thought we would be.鈥�

That early interest, he said, reflects frustration among public institutions around finances. In particular, public universities are mandated to undergo audits from the state, but also feel burdened by audits required by accreditors.

鈥淧ublic universities already undergo multiple audits and state budget oversight,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hen accreditation requires them to do the same work again. It feels like reinventing the wheel and it pulls faculty and staff away from teaching and research.鈥�

Harrison estimates it will take five to seven years for the new accreditor to be fully up and running, and that institutions will need to maintain dual accreditation to avoid risking Pell Grants and federal loans.

The commission is busypeer review teams made up primarily of current and former public university leaders such as governing board members, system chancellors, provosts, chief financial officers, deans and faculty. In contrast to regional accreditors, which typically draw reviewers from both public and private institutions, the new commission is prioritizing reviewers from public universities.

鈥淯ltimately, we want to be a true nationwide accreditor,鈥� Harrison said. 鈥淣ot a regional one. Not a partisan one. Just one that is organized around sector and peer expertise.鈥�

While the creation of a public university accreditor is new, the concept of sector-specific accreditation exists in other parts of higher education, including for two-year colleges.

Mac Powell, president of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, said that tailoring accreditation to a sector can make the peer-review model more meaningful, because reviewers can identify with similar challenges. He said reviewers have been moving away from measuring resources and bureaucratic compliance toward assessing what students actually get out of their education.

鈥淭he big shift was moving from counting inputs to asking, 鈥楧id students actually learn what we said they would learn?鈥欌�� said Powell, whose organization accredits 138 colleges across Arizona, California, New York and the Pacific.

The most important metric all accreditation models should value is how they transition their students into the workforce, he said.

鈥淓very accreditor today is paying much more attention to retention, persistence, transfer, career outcomes and return on investment,鈥� Powell said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 becoming less about how many books are in the library and more about whether students can find a pathway to the middle class.鈥�

The institution evolves

Stephen Pruitt is in his first year as the president of SACSCOC, the accreditation organization that the half-dozen Southern state university systems just left. Pruitt, a Georgia native, jokes that his 鈥淪outhern accent and front-porch style鈥� has helped him break down the importance of accreditation to just about anyone.

In simple terms, he said, accreditation is the system that makes college degrees real. But he feels he has to clarify a misconception about the role of accreditation agencies like SACSCOC.

鈥淭here鈥檚 this myth that I鈥檓 sitting in Atlanta deciding if institutions are good or not,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 not how American accreditation works. Your peers evaluate you. People who do the same work you do.鈥�

At the same time, Pruitt isn鈥檛 dismissing the concerns that prompted states such as Florida and North Carolina to explore alternatives to SACSCOC. According to Pruitt, institutions have long raised concerns about slow turnaround times, redundant paperwork and standards that have not always adapted quickly to the evolving landscape in higher education.

鈥淪ome of the frustration is real. Institutions want less redundancy and more responsiveness. Competition isn鈥檛 something we鈥檙e afraid of,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e鈥檙e doing a full audit of our processes. We have to be more contemporary. Faster approvals, more flexibility, more transparency. Accreditation shouldn鈥檛 just be the stick. It should be the carrot too.鈥�

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

The U.S. Department of Education is expected to reopen for business Thursday after the in history. Education Secretary Linda McMahon is likely to pick up where she left off 43 days ago, reshaping the federal role in school policy and trying to phase out the agency.

The staff won鈥檛 be as small as the Trump administration had hoped. McMahon gutted the offices overseeing special education, K-12 and civil rights at the start of the shutdown, but a federal judge paused the job cuts and the reopening agreement in Congress . The deal to end the shutdown prohibits any additional terminations through Jan. 30, the next deadline for lawmakers to finalize the 2026 federal budget. 

Two more top officials will also soon join McMahon鈥檚 team. In October, the Senate confirmed Kimberly Richey to lead the Office for Civil Rights and Kirsten Baesler as assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education. Neither could be sworn in during the shutdown. 

Baesler, former North Dakota education chief, is likely to take the lead on considering waiver requests from Indiana and Iowa and managing other 鈥渁dministration-wide priorities, like moving away from 鈥楧EI鈥� and increasing the use of AI,鈥� said Julia Martin, director of policy and government affairs with The Bruman Group, a Washington law firm. 

and want the department to distribute federal funds as a block grant with fewer requirements on how to spend them. In September, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds pointed to an to make the case that states can be trusted to manage federal funds without the Education Department.

Margaret Buckton, a school finance expert and the executive director of the Urban Education Network in Iowa, generally supports the state鈥檚 plan. She explained that funding from one federal grant is often not 鈥渟ignificant enough to move the needle on school improvement.鈥�

But say that the Every Student Succeeds Act, which includes funding for high-poverty schools and several other targeted programs, already allows ample flexibility and warn that blending the money could mean districts won鈥檛 spend it the way Congress intended. 

Indiana also wants to change the way it grades school performance by highlighting qualities such as developing students鈥� work ethic and financial literacy. Anne Hyslop, director of policy development at All4Ed, an advocacy group, said the request is premature because the state is still on its new accountability plan. She questioned whether the new design would still include measures like graduation rates and progress for English learners. 

鈥淭here are particular accountability requirements that are really important,鈥� she said, 鈥渁nd have always been really important for the last 20-plus years.鈥� 

Here are a six other areas that were affected by the budget impasse.

1. Moving special education to HHS

In trying to fulfill her goal to eliminate the department, McMahon has taken steps to transfer oversight of special education programs to the Department of Health and Human Services despite having no authorization from Congress and strong opposition from advocacy groups. 

鈥淭he department is exploring additional partnerships with federal agencies to support special education programs without any interruption or impact on students with disabilities, but no agreement has been signed,鈥� spokeswoman Madi Biedermann said in an Oct. 21 statement. 鈥淪ecretary McMahon is fully committed to protecting the federal funding streams that support our nation’s students with disabilities.”

Opponents of the move say the department is turning its back on students with disabilities.

鈥淭his isn’t about handing power to states,鈥� Jacqueline Rodriguez, CEO of the National Center for Learning Disabilities, said last week during a call with reporters. 鈥淚t’s about walking away from our responsibility to children and hoping that no one notices.鈥� 

For families, the past several months have created confusion over whether their children will continue to receive the services they need, and advocates have discovered broken links and missing documents about civil rights investigations and state monitoring reports on the department鈥檚 website. 

鈥淢oving [the department鈥檚] digital infrastructure to another agency could mean months 鈥� or years 鈥� of lost access to critical records,鈥� Callie Oettinger, an advocate in Virginia, wrote this week in her blog, . 

But some parents say states might be more responsive than the federal government when conflicts with districts arise.

鈥淚 feel like if you push the oversight closer to the community, then you can get better results,鈥� said Tricia Ambeau, an Arkansas mother of two whose eighth grader Emma has Down Syndrome and autism. A conservative, she previously served on the board of Disability Rights of Arkansas, but stepped down during the pandemic. State officials, she said, 鈥渃an make a two-hour drive to a school district and knock on the door and say 鈥榃hat’s going on here?鈥� You’re never going to get that at the federal level.鈥� 

2. Food stamps

While the Department of Agriculture, not Education, runs the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the shutdown and a court battle over whether the government would distribute full benefits has caused stress and chaos for families with school-age children. 

The end of the shutdown means recipients鈥� electronic benefit transfer cards should be refilled as normal. 

School districts across the country, like and , increased efforts to distribute food to needy families and served additional meals. encouraged parents to apply for free- and reduced-price lunch if their kids were not already on the program.

鈥淚t is important to remember that these families were not given the opportunity to plan and budget for this moment. How do you shop for groceries without knowing how many days or months you need the food to last?鈥� Chastity Lord, president and CEO of the Jeremiah Program, said in a statement. The nonprofit supports 2,000 single mothers across nine cities.

3. Proposed rule change on racial disparities in special education

While the government was closed, the department continued to receive comments on a proposed to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The department wants to lift the requirement that states submit data on racial and other disparities in special education services, including whether students with disabilities disproportionately receive harsher discipline.

In the announcement, the department said the change would 鈥渞educe the burden on respondents when completing the annual state application.鈥�

Data shows that Black students are for some special education categories, like intellectual disabilities and behavioral disorders, but underidentified for other services like dyslexia and autism. Students with disabilities are also suspended and expelled at higher rates than other students, government . The department鈥檚 recommendation would align with Trump鈥檚 that discourages schools from focusing on equity in school discipline and using less-punitive practices like conflict resolution. 

The department received over 100 comments on the proposal, with many opposed to the idea of suspending the requirement. The current rule 鈥渆nsures transparency and promotes fairness in educational opportunity for all students,鈥� EdTrust, an advocacy organization, wrote in .

Michael Petrilli, president of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute, has for policies that remove disruptive students from the classroom. 

鈥淏ut the answer is not to kill the data collection,鈥� he said.

4. Charter school grants

One way that McMahon has promoted the administration鈥檚 school choice agenda is by highlighting and increasing spending on charter schools. Weeks before the shutdown, the department awarded $500 million in grants to charter schools, which included an additional $60 million over the current $440 million for the Charter Schools Program.

But just as the funds went out to states, charter networks and schools, the shutdown began, cutting off new grantees鈥� access to start-up support during a 鈥渃rucial window,鈥� said Brittnee Baker, communications director for the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools.

In , which received $30 million, the disruption has delayed progress toward launching several new schools and expanding others. But some critics argue that the department is boosting funding for the sector at a time of slowing growth and charter closures. 

鈥淧olitics, not need, now drives program expansion,鈥� said a from the Network for Public Education. Diane Ravitch, a former Education Department official during the H.W. Bush administration, co-founded the advocacy organization.

5. Prayer guidance

The shutdown also interrupted work on school prayer guidance that President Donald Trump said the department would issue as part of a on 鈥減rotecting our religious freedoms.鈥�

Officials last following the U.S. Supreme Court鈥檚 decision in Kennedy vs. Bremerton, which held that a Washington school district could not stop a football coach from praying on the 50-yard line after games. 

The document clarified that school employees have a right to personal prayer or other forms of religious expression, like wearing a cross, during school hours, but they cannot “compel, coerce, persuade or encourage students鈥� to participate.

The 2023 guidance has 鈥渟erved to help schools and community members understand their rights and responsibilities under the First Amendment,鈥� said Maggie Siddiqi, senior fellow at the Interfaith Alliance, a nonprofit counteracting the religious right. She worked on the update when she served as director of the Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships at the department during the Biden administration. 

As the Trump administration appeals to Christian conservatives, it 鈥渄oes not have authority to do away with the First Amendment鈥� through guidance, she said and warned that parents and educators should watch for any language that allows schools to impose 鈥渙ne specific religious view on their entire student body.鈥� 

As a refresher, AASA, the School Superintendents Association, addressed the topic in its . The issue features a on religion in public schools from the Freedom Forum, a nonprofit focusing on First Amendment rights. With the administration and state leaders often emphasizing Christianity over other faiths and some states passing laws that set aside , the document answers 23 questions about what the law says. 

6. McMahon鈥檚 50-state tour

The secretary still has 40 states to go on her 鈥淩eturning Education to the States鈥� tour, which kicked off in August. 

While she primarily highlights charters and private schools on her visits, she has hit a few district schools on her route, including in Clinton, Tennessee, and in Bozeman, Montana.

McMahon said she鈥檚 gathering examples of promising practices for on issues such as literacy and school discipline, that the department will issue to states. But Cara Jackson, immediate past president of the Association for Education Finance and Policy, said the department wants to 鈥渢ake credit鈥� for some of the work that was in progress when it canceled funding for research. The association was among the groups that to the Institute for Education Sciences and the termination of regional education labs. The cases are ongoing, but of the contracts were later reinstated.

Proponents of eliminating the department don鈥檛 see the point.

鈥淭he information might be useful, but it is contradictory to shutting down the U.S. Department of Education,鈥� said Neal McCluskey, director of educational freedom at the libertarian Cato Institute. 鈥淲hy do it if you don鈥檛 think the department should exist at all?鈥�

颁辞谤谤别肠迟颈辞苍:听An earlier version of this article misstated the number of comments made on a proposed rule change to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which was provided by a government website. The correct number of comments was 100.

Led by U.S. Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Dan Goldman and Adriano Espaillat, they expressed 鈥減rofound concern鈥� to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and Education Secretary Linda McMahon 鈥渁bout the pattern of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) targeting K-12 public school students throughout the country.鈥�

They cited the cases of five young New Yorkers 鈥� including a 6-year-old Ecuadorian girl who was in August while her brother, , remained in adult Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention. Two other siblings, one a K-12 student, were left in New York without their mother.

鈥淚CE鈥檚 targeting of not only adults without criminal convictions, but also children and families, negates the administration鈥檚 stated policy of going after the 鈥榳orst of the worst鈥� for deportation proceedings,鈥� they note in signed by eight other New York Democratic U.S. representatives, including Ritchie Torres and Jerrold Nadler.

They demanded to know the total number of students 鈥� from kindergarten to college-age 鈥� arrested by the Department of Homeland Security since President Donald Trump took office in January. They want to learn how many remain in ICE custody, their average length of stay and what percentage were or are being held alongside their families. 

They further asked how the U.S. government is meeting its legal obligation to educate these children and, more specifically, about the quality and language proficiency of the teaching staff. 

鈥淭he Department of Education has the responsibility under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution to ensure that all students have equal access to education,鈥� they wrote. 鈥淧lease provide copies of curricula, sample lesson plans, and rubrics currently in use at ICE detention facilities, processing sites, and Office of Refugee Resettlement shelters.鈥�

An Education Department spokeswoman said Monday that it will respond to the letter when the government reopens. In a statement to 社区黑料, DHS did not answer any questions about the school-age children detained by its agents, but blamed the media for 鈥渁ttempting to create a climate of fear and smear law enforcement.鈥�

Ocasio-Cortez and Espaillat did not respond to 社区黑料鈥檚 requests for comment. A spokesperson for Goldman, whose district encompasses Lower Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn, said he 鈥渞emains extremely committed to holding ICE accountable for terrorizing our schools and communities.鈥�  

The U.S. representatives鈥� worry about the fate of immigrant children echoes concerns being voiced nationally. Advocates say their communities are living in are targeted near school grounds, particularly in and where ICE tactics have been aggressive. 

Alarm over agents鈥� actions and their apparent lack of accountability was a central theme of the more than 2,700 attended by millions across the country this past weekend. 

Ranking Democratic members of two congressional subcommittees said Monday against ICE agents, citing that more than 170 U.S. citizens have been held 鈥� including nearly 20 children. 

鈥淭here’s no boundaries in this dragnet,鈥� Rebecca Brown, a supervising attorney with Public Counsel鈥檚 Immigrants鈥� Rights Project, told 社区黑料 . 鈥淣ow there’s no 鈥榦ff limits.鈥� Everything is fair game.鈥�

Not only are children and their parents being swept up near school grounds, Brown said the current federal government shutdown is making it increasingly difficult for families 鈥� and attorneys 鈥� to locate anyone who鈥檚 been detained.

鈥淲ith this administration and with this budget shutdown, it is really hard to get folks on the phone,鈥� she said.

Immigrant advocacy organizations are urging parents to make guardianship plans, including those specific to their child鈥檚 schooling. One such group, in response to the massive uptick in enforcement efforts, said for the first time it鈥檚 helped some 100 families this year make binding educational plans for their kids in case their parents or guardians are arrested or deported.

鈥淲e have not used this in prior years,鈥� said Julie Babayeva, supervising attorney at the New York Legal Assistance Group’s LegalHealth Unit. 鈥淲e are doing this much more now. This is becoming super urgent.鈥�

More than were in government detention in late September, according to a clearinghouse that tracks federal data. More than 71% had no criminal convictions. More than unaccompanied minors were in government custody as of Oct. 20, according to the Department of Health and Human Services. The Office of Refugee Resettlement, which is under HHS, oversees their care at some and programs in 24 states and is charged with detainees鈥� schooling. ORR did not respond to requests for comment.

Undocumented immigrants over 18 are sent to adult holding sites. Dylan Lopez Contreras, 20 and a student at a New York City high school dedicated to older newcomers, is among them. The Bronx resident was arrested in May in a high-profile case and remains in detention as his lawyers denying him asylum and deporting him back to Venezuela.

Contreras鈥檚 case was also cited in the letter to Noem and McMahon, with the representatives noting he is being held hundreds of miles away from his family in Pennsylvania at the 鈥淢oshannon Valley Processing Center, from which there have been reports of insufficient medical care and use of solitary confinement.鈥�

Conditions at both and have been widely criticized. In addition to concerns about young people鈥檚 overall health and safety, at these sites: substandard curriculum and untrained or underqualified staff are among many complaints. 

Just last week, immigrant from Everett, Massachusetts, was arrested after authorities fielded a 鈥渃redible tip鈥� in which the student was said to have made 鈥渁 violent threat against another boy within our public school.鈥� 

His mother, who arrived at the local police station to pick him up, was instead told ICE had already taken him away. The family, from Brazil, has a pending asylum claim. The mother from two different immigration facilities, one in Massachusetts and the other in Virginia. 

鈥淗e cried a lot because he had never been away from home or his family,鈥� she said. 鈥淗e was desperate, saying ICE had taken him.鈥�

Erika Richmond-Walton, a litigation fellow at Boston-based Lawyers for Civil Rights, said the detention and deportation of young kids 鈥渋s definitely not protecting or advancing their educational rights. Deporting children contradicts decades of settled law.鈥� 

And even if the children themselves are not targeted, the removal of their parents is devastating. One California mother is bereft after her husband was detained in late September after dropping off their 8-year-old daughter at school. 

The woman, who asked not to be identified for fear of immigration enforcement, told 社区黑料 she talks with her husband every day through video chat and that she expects him to be deported to their country of origin. She said government officials told her husband they are 鈥渨aiting for the plane to fill up so they can send it to Colombia.鈥� 

, said the well-documented damage to school-age children of aggressive deportation extends far beyond increased absenteeism, anxiety and plummeting grades. In a just society, he said, young people learn political norms through what they see.

鈥淲hen a child watches a federal agent drag a parent from a car line or hauls someone off in front of classmates, they absorb a lived lesson: Power may be exercised arbitrarily, and some lives can be violated in public without accountability,鈥� he said. 

Adaku Onyeka-Crawford, director of the Opportunity To Learn Program and a senior attorney at The Advancement Project, located in Washington, D.C., said immigrants at schools is dubious.  

鈥淚 think this administration is tricky when it鈥檚 saying we are not sending ICE to schools but are sending ICE after students who are on their way to school 鈥� and targeting communities and children no matter where they are or what their age.鈥�

Prior administrations took such circumstances into account, at least to an extent, said Brown of the Public Counsel鈥檚 Immigrants鈥� Rights Project. But early on in his second term, Trump rescinded a longstanding restriction against immigration agents carrying out enforcement actions in so-called sensitive locations, including schools.

鈥淭here was some consideration for age and vulnerability,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e’ve seen an uptick in enforcement around schools. 鈥� This is by design: You punish the kids in order to get the parents to comply.鈥�