TEACHER EDUCATION DIVISION   |   COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

Washington Update

June 2026

Friends and colleagues,

The semester has wound down, though I know the work never really pauses for this group; you have been at it all along, and so has Washington. As you know, the President’s fiscal year 2027 budget request is out, and it carries real consequences for the programs that hold up our field. Below is what matters most, anchored by a resource I want to make sure every TED member knows how to use, plus a few other developments, including one with a comment window worth your time.

The CEF Budget Book: A Resource Worth Naming

I know we already walked through the FY 2027 budget together, so let me be clear about what this is and is not. This is not me handing you the same analysis a second time, dressed up. What I want to do is point you to the resource behind that work, the actual tool we have access to.  It is the Committee for Education Funding’s annual Budget Book: a program-by-program analysis of the President’s education budget that CEF, the nation’s oldest and largest education coalition, publishes every year. The FY 2027 edition came out this month, and it is the single best reference any of us has for this fight.

Here is why it is worth knowing this exists. CEF puts this book in front of every education staffer on Capitol Hill, so it is the reference Congress itself reaches for when working through these numbers, and it is the one I reach for too. Leaning on it is a big part of how I try to be a resource, both to all of you and to the members of Congress and their staff we work with. TED’s seat at that coalition table is part of how this gets done and how it reaches you, so keep the Budget Book close as your own go-to source when you make the case for our programs.

Source: Committee for Education Funding, FY 2027 Budget Analysis (June 2026)

With that, here is where the four programs at the center of TED’s advocacy stand in the request, all in one place:

• IDEA Part D, Personnel Preparation ($115M in FY 2026). The request consolidates the IDEA discretionary programs into the main Part B State Grant. Total special education funding actually rises by $539 million (3.5%), so this is consolidation rather than a line-item cut, but Part B is a service-delivery formula, not a personnel-preparation program. Folded in, our field’s dedicated federal lever for building the special educator workforce loses its identity. TED’s position: preserve Personnel Preparation as a distinct, robustly funded line.
• Teacher Quality Partnership ($70M), eliminated. Zeroed out entirely. Worth remembering: the Department withheld most of TQP’s FY 2025 funding, and Congress restored it for FY 2026. This is the second attempt at the same outcome. TED’s position: restore and fund.
• Augustus F. Hawkins Centers of Excellence ($15M), eliminated. One of the only federal programs designed to build the educator pipeline at minority-serving institutions. TED’s position: protect and fund as both a workforce-sufficiency and workforce-diversity priority.
• NCSER, Research in Special Education ($64M), cut to $10M. An ~84% cut to the only federal center dedicated to special education research and to training the next generation of special education researchers. TED’s position: fund at the highest possible level and restore paused competitions and peer review.

The most important thing to carry into a conversation with an appropriator: this is a request, not a result, and we know the results we want and that’s what we are here to conveny. Congress rejected nearly identical cuts a year ago and restored funding for these very programs. The FY 2027 appropriations process is the next window, and it is open now.

A Federal Grantmaking Rule, and a Comment Window That Matters

The Office of Management and Budget has proposed a government-wide rule revising the terms under which institutions receive federal grants, with provisions aimed specifically at diversity, equity, and inclusion practices in higher education and federally funded research. It would direct agencies, including the Department of Education, to prohibit certain practices among grant recipients and to add new descriptions-of-work requirements for payment requests. One provision higher-education groups have flagged as a relative positive: it advises agencies to keep applying negotiated indirect cost rates rather than capping them.

The rule carries a 45-day public comment period and targets a final rule effective by October 1, which would govern the requirements attached to FY 2027 awards. If you administer federal grants for preparation, research, or technical assistance, this is the rare moment the process invites your voice, and a specific, operationally grounded comment is high-leverage. I will circulate the Federal Register citation and the comment portal the moment the rule publishes.

Also Worth Knowing

• Accreditation overhaul reaches consensus. Negotiators agreed on a framework to reshape college accreditation, the system every IHE-based preparation program answers to, easing credit transfer, lowering barriers for new accreditors, and addressing academic-freedom and intellectual-diversity standards. A proposed rule is expected later this summer, final on or before November 1, effective July 1, 2027.
• A $144M IDEA investment and new Part C guidance. On May 13 the Department announced $144 million to help states expand interventions for students with disabilities, alongside new guidance allowing Part C early-intervention funds to support expectant parents of infants with disabilities, a useful expansion for those preparing early-intervention personnel, and a reminder that IDEA still draws bipartisan support.
• MSI funds redirected. The Departments of Education and Labor moved roughly $350 million in FY 2026 minority-serving-institution funds into a one-time expansion of the Strengthening Institutions Program, drawing bipartisan pushback. Read alongside the proposed elimination of HSI and other MSI lines, it is one trend line worth tracking for the diversity of the educator pipeline.
• Charter schools before Senate HELP. On May 20 the Senate HELP Committee held a hearing titled “Meeting the Individual Needs of All Students: The Role of Charter Schools.” A witness from the Center for Learner Equity put students with disabilities squarely in the conversation, a reminder that our field’s expertise on appropriate services and qualified personnel belongs in the charter debate. The FY 2027 request would raise the Charter Schools Program by $60M (14%), one of only three programs slated for an increase.

What You Can Do This Cycle

1. Comment on the proposed grantmaking rule. When it publishes, the 45-day window opens. If you hold federal grants, an operationally specific comment is one of the highest-leverage things you can do. Watch for the citation and link from me.
2. Make the FY 2027 case to your appropriators, by program name. Name them: IDEA Personnel Preparation, NCSER’s special education research, TQP, and Hawkins. Tie each to a real project, student, or shortage in your state. That specificity is what moves a staffer. Our monthly Virtual Washington Update with the TED Policy Committee is the easiest way to plug in.

Closing

Read at face value, this budget would dissolve the dedicated federal investment in special educator preparation and gut special education research in a single cycle. But “at face value” is the operative phrase. It is a proposal, the same kind Congress declined to adopt last year, and we get to engage that process again now. Our advantage has never been our budget; it is the credibility of the people who actually prepare special educators and do the research, speaking plainly to those who hold the pen. That is still true.

Thank you for the work you do, and for making time to stay engaged in this part of it. 

I will be in touch, you can count on it. 

With appreciation,
Kait 
Policy Advisor, Teacher Education Division
@brennan_kait

Questions, program developments, or members in the news? Reach out anytime, I want to hear what you’re seeing on the ground.