Should Trump literally or seriously be taken in the closing education department? – 74

Get stories like you are delivered directly to your entrance tray. Register for Bulletin 74

President Donald Trump says he wants to “dismantle” the United States Department of Education.

What would that mean for United States schools?

The answer depends on whether to take Trump literally and assume that the entire department would cease, or take it seriously in the sense that he wants to close the department, but change many of his flows and financing functions to other federal agencies. The latter is closer to how the Heritage Foundation Project 2025 and former director of the Institute of Education Sciences Mark Schneider Describe the potential changes.

For example, the 2025 project recommended changing money and money on special education through the Interiño Education Law with disabilities (IDEA) in the Department of Health and Human Services.

As Linda Jacobson of the 74 noted Earlier this month, these and other programs administered by the Department of Education are authorized by Congress, so decisions on financing levels and supervision should reach Congress. But the Trump administration could try to move the financing currents and weaken their federal supervision. For example, project 2025 also recommended converting the title I program and the idea of ​​its current forms to “formula formula without ties”.

I worked with him South Carolina Children’s Fund To understand how these problems could develop for states and schools. Here are three potential scenarios:

Take Trump literally: the department is closed and all its programs cease to exist

Most people could assume that closing the department means that all their operations will cease. Given the political dynamics of Congress, this is unlikely. Even so, it is important to understand the complete set of funds flowing from the department.

This year, school districts receive It is estimated that $ 44 billion in formula funds for primary and secondary programs of the department. In addition to a wide variety of competitive Subsidy programs And other order lines, this includes:

• $ 18.6 billion for low -income students in the schools of Title I;
• $ 15.4 billion for students with disabilities under idea;
• $ 2.2 billion for district investments in class size reductions and other teacher initiatives;
• $ 1.3 billion for programs before and after school;
• $ 940 million for English students;
• $ 1.5 billion for professional and adult education.

The department also supervises higher education funds. This year, university students throughout the country will receive an estimate of $ 41.4 billion in Pell subsidies and work study funds, and will obtain $ 93 billion in student loans backed by the federal government. If the department is closed, that financing would also be at risk.

Trump take seriously but not literally: the department is closed, but many of its financing transmissions live in other federal agencies

Under this scenario, the situation is less serious. It is possible that Congress can simply move the financing currents that are currently in the department to health and human services, treasure or other agencies. If all programs found a new home, schools could be financially harmless.

However, the authors of the 2025 project proposed that Congress change both to the agency responsible for the financing of federal education and the form taken by financing. If they became block subsidies, which lead to less federal supervision, the states would no longer be subject to government requirements around annual evidence, school responsibility or services for English students and students with disabilities. Students would also lose important federal protections.

Similarly, the Department’s civil rights office has the task of resolving legal complaints and accusations of discrimination against schools and districts. Only in 2024, Americans Presented 12,081 complaints from OCR In a variety of crimes, mainly related to disability rights, racial or sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination. If the department closed, it is not clear where these types of cases would be resolved, or if the claimants would have the same rights to request a resolution as they do now.

Congress does not make changes: money continues to flow, and the Trump administration weakens and arm the department

Given the current political dynamics, this is perhaps the most likely result. It is unlikely that the Republicans of Congress have the votes to dismantle the department completely, and it is likely that they do not have the time or political capital to think about a complete replacement plan. During the Trump’s first administration, for example, the president’s official budget proposed a handful of programmatic cuts, but Congress mostly ignored and continued funds Title I, idea and other programs in or slightly above their previous levels. If this scenario takes place, schools would not be financially affected, since money would continue to flow at current levels.

But the administration could still try to weaken the department and its influence on state and local educational policy. Some of this has already begun to take shape, with a series of contract Cancellations and dismissal of department workers hired in the last 12 months.

It is not clear how far this will get. Would the Administration stop enforcing certain provisions of the Federal Law, including perhaps the requirement of annual evidence or the identification and intervention in low performance schools? Twelve state bosses have already sent A letter Asking for more flexibility of financing and exemptions to unidentified federal requirements. A signer was the head of North Dakota, Kirsten Baesler, who has since been nominated as the assistant secretary of the department.

Although the new leadership of the department has not yet taken over, the administration has also tried to assemble the federal role by launching OCR research on gender problems related to Use of bathroom and sports. The department also sent a letter from “dear colleague” warning that OCR plans investigate schools or districts that pursue what the Administration considers that it is exposed on issues related to gender and diversity, equity and inclusion.

Ultimately, the Administration will have to make a decision on educational policy. Do you want to give control to local states and districts or wade in very fine grain details about the curriculum, sports and bathrooms? Until now, he has chosen more for the latter than for the first.

Get stories like you are delivered directly to your entrance tray. Register for Bulletin 74