The Department of Education has entered into agreements with four other federal agencies to outsource some key functions. Here’s why it’s important:
Why the federal role in education remains important
The Ministry of Education was created to level the playing field. This is why students with disabilities and marginalized communities still rely on this program.
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump’s long-standing promise to dismantle the federal Department of Education may sound simple, but his attempts to carry it out have been stymied by major obstacles, including court challenges, congressional opposition and even some of his own signature legislation.
This week he came a lot closer to fulfilling his promise.
On Tuesday, November 18, his administration took its biggest step yet to weaken the agency’s influence. Officials announced six agreements with four other federal agencies, including the Departments of Labor, State, Interior and Health and Human Services, to outsource key education programs within other departments of government.
In a meeting with staff Tuesday afternoon, Education Secretary Linda McMahon described the changes as a gradual way to move toward the Trump administration’s ultimate goal of urging Congress to abolish the department entirely. While Capitol Hill doesn’t have enough support to do that at this time, McMahon said he is committed to evaluating how realignment would work.
“I’m all about results,” the former wrestling industry executive told employees, according to a summary of his remarks. “That would take a lot of effort.”
There are still many unknowns about when the changes will take place and what they will mean for students and schools. As long as the same staff and funding remain intact in the major programs (which appears to be the case at this point), simply transferring them to other institutions is likely to have limited impact on the public. The Ministry of Education also remains responsible for overseeing the program.
Trump administration officials maintain that their efforts will ultimately improve the functioning of government education agencies. But some experts, including Margaret Spellings, former education secretary under former Republican President George W. Bush, worry that the unrest could disrupt critical services that schools rely on.
“Moving programs from one department to another does not actually eliminate federal bureaucracy and can make it difficult for students, teachers, and families to navigate the system and get the help they need,” she said in a statement.
What changes from ED? Title I, HBCU support, and charter school subsidies.
At some point in the near future, dozens of major programs will begin to move out of the Department of Education. These include:
- Title I, A program that provides approximately $20 billion in annual funding to low-income school districts.
- federal funding for After-school and before-school programs;
- teacher training grants;
- subsidy for rural school;
- children’s literacy skills grants;
- program for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), tribal university (TCU) and hispanic educational institutions (HSI);
- subsidy for charter school;
- K-12 program native american student;
- subsidy for Parenting for college students;
- of fulbright haze International research program (already suspended).
- and Foreign medical school certification.
The list goes on.
Many of these functions collectively cost billions of dollars, are complex to administer, and have been key to the Department of Education’s identity for decades. Their impact touches the lives of countless students.
School superintendents and college financial aid officials are worried about problems.
After the changes were announced on Nov. 18, education advocacy groups expressed concerns about how fallout would affect schools.
Chief among the critics were school superintendents. David R. Schuler, executive director of the Association of School Superintendents, said while district leaders share the goal of improving key programs, restructuring may not be the right approach.
“Many school districts are already operating with limited administrative capacity and may need more student-focused resources to adapt to new oversight structures, reporting protocols, and instruction,” he said in a statement. “We urge the administration to carefully plan this realignment while working closely with state and local education leaders.”
The university’s financial aid office issued a similar warning. Melanie Storey, president of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators, urged the Department of Education to “act with extreme caution.”
“Just as, for example, ED staff cannot be expected to have a comprehensive understanding of employment law, we cannot assume that other agency staff have or can quickly acquire the expertise necessary to effectively administer these programs,” she said in a statement.
What is the timeline?
The timeline for transferring staff to other institutions has not yet been made public. But one precedent provides a rough idea.
In May, the Department of Education signed the first interagency agreement to transfer the Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education to the Department of Labor. It wasn’t until October that staff there actually started talking in detail about the new agency.
Education Department officials acknowledged this week that it will take time for the new transition to begin in earnest.
Zachary Schermele is a Congressional reporter for USA TODAY. You can email us at zschermele@usatoday.com. Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and on Bluesky at @zachschermele.bsky.social..
