Washington Update, May 5, 2025
Dear Colleagues:
The Administration released its initial FY 2026 discretionary budget request—a 46-page “skinny budget”—marking the first step in what will be a months-long appropriations process. While more detailed programmatic breakdowns are expected in the coming weeks, this topline budget provides early insight into the Administration’s priorities and proposed cuts across education, workforce, and human services.
Key Themes and Takeaways:
• Major Cuts to Education:
The budget proposes a $12.4 billion (15%) reduction to the U.S. Department of Education, bringing its discretionary funding to $66.7 billion. This represents the deepest proposed cut since FY 1981.
• Department of Education Remains Intact:
Despite earlier proposals to eliminate or transfer key functions (notably IDEA) to other agencies, the Department of Education continues to exist under this proposal.
K–12 Education Proposals:
• New K–12 Block Grant, Major Consolidations:
Proposes combining 18–24 existing K–12 programs (outside of Title I and IDEA) into a new, undefined $2 billion formula grant—a $4.5 billion (66%) cut. Programs likely impacted include afterschool, school safety, teacher development, magnet schools, and education for homeless youth. The administration has not provided details on which programs are included or how the new formula will operate.
• Special Education Restructuring:
IDEA is renamed the “Special Education Simplified Funding” program, folding all special education grants into a single formula while maintaining IDEA law. The Administration emphasizes parental rights and warns that funding could be withdrawn from states or districts that do not comply with those rights.
• Title I Claims Full Funding, But with Cuts Hidden:
While the Administration states it is “preserving full funding for Title I,” it eliminates $376 million for Migrant Education and $52 million for HEP/CAMP. Literacy-focused Title I programs may also be at risk.
• Charter Schools:
The only K–12 program to receive an increase—$60 million more for charter school expansion.
Higher Education & Student Aid:
• Widespread Eliminations:
o Federal Work Study cut by $980 million (80%)
o TRIO ($1.2B), SEOG ($910M), GEAR-UP ($388M), Child Care for Student Parents ($75M), FIPSE, Teacher Quality Partnerships, and Strengthening Institutions all eliminated
• No Mention of Pell Grants:
Presumed to be level-funded. No mention of new investments or policy changes.
• Institute of Education Sciences (IES):
Not mentioned, though most staff have reportedly been let go. Expect major cuts or restructuring.
Early Childhood & Child Care:
• Head Start Omitted:
Despite rumors of elimination, the skinny budget is silent on Head Start funding. Watch for updates in the full budget.
• Preschool Development Grants:
$315 million program eliminated under HHS.
• Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG):
No details provided—unclear if funding is maintained or cut.
Workforce Development & Labor:
• Department of Labor cut by $4.6 billion (35%)
• Replaces existing programs with a new “Make America Skilled Again” workforce grant, cutting overall workforce development funding by 29% ($1.6 billion). Details are scarce, but consolidation will likely impact adult training, youth workforce programs, and apprenticeships.
Additional Eliminations:
• Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS):Fully eliminated.
• Corporation for National and Community Service:Also eliminated.
IDEA Funding Structure Raises Concerns About Shift to HHS
The Administration’s FY26 “skinny budget” proposes consolidating all special education funding under a new “Special Education Simplified Funding Program.” While the budget claims it will continue to uphold IDEA law and parental rights, the vague language—particularly the reference to funding being “withdrawn from states and districts who flout parental rights”—has raised concerns in the education policy community. Notably, while the proposal stops short of stating that IDEA will be moved to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the language mirrors previous public statements from the Administration expressing a desire to relocate certain education programs, including IDEA, under HHS. This could represent a significant structural shift in how special education is administered and protected, or not.
Special Education Simplified Funding Program (p. 7) – funding level held flat with FY 2024/25
The Administration states it is “preserving” special education funding by maintaining current FY 2025 levels but proposes consolidating seven IDEA programs into one new formula: the Special Education Simplified Funding Program. The stated goal is to reduce the federal footprint, cut staffing at the Department of Education, and ease administrative burden on states and districts. However, this also means eliminating targeted IDEA programs that were designed to address specific needs—like personnel development and technical assistance. While IDEA law would technically remain in place, the budget emphasizes “parental rights” as a funding condition and explicitly notes that dollars could be withheld from states or districts deemed noncompliant. This shift raises serious questions about how special education will be administered and enforced, and who gets to decide what “compliance” looks like.
Why This Matters: IDEA, IES, and Teacher Training
The proposed restructuring of IDEA into the “Special Education Simplified Funding Program” and the vague threats around state compliance introduce major uncertainty into how federal special education funds will be distributed—and enforced. The lack of clarity invites legal and logistical chaos at the state and district levels, undermining decades of bipartisan progress in ensuring access to a free appropriate public education for students with disabilities.
Moreover, the absence of any mention of the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) suggests the Administration may deprioritize independent, data-driven education research. IES plays a central role in evaluating the effectiveness of programs, informing policy decisions, and ensuring accountability across education systems. The reported staff layoffs hint at a hollowing-out of federal research infrastructure just when policymakers and educators face mounting questions about learning recovery, educator shortages, and school safety.
Finally, the elimination of Teacher Quality Partnerships and other teacher pipeline programs arrives at a time when nearly every state is grappling with a teacher shortage crisis—particularly in special education and STEM. Removing these supports not only damages current preparation efforts but risks exacerbating workforce shortages for years to come.
Final Notes and What to Watch:
• This budget reflects a dramatic rethinking of federal education and workforce funding, prioritizing consolidation, parental control language, and steep cuts to evidence-based, targeted supports for vulnerable populations.
• Expect significant resistance in the Senate, where 60 votes would be required to enact cuts of this magnitude—many of which echo the FY 2025 House bill that never reached a floor vote due to bipartisan concern.
• The lack of detail around program consolidation, new formula designs, and enforcement mechanisms underscores that the final FY 2026 budget is far from settled.
Update: ED Cancels $1 Billion in School Mental Health Grants
Last week, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) began notifying grantees that it will terminate both the School-Based Mental Health Services Grant and the Mental Health Service Professionals Demonstration Grant Program at the conclusion of the current contract year. These cancellations impact approximately $1 billion in funding.
According to ED, the programs do not align with the Trump Administration’s interpretation of civil rights laws and allegedly fail to meet “standards of merit and fairness” in federal grantmaking. As a result, the Administration has decided to discontinue the programs entirely and reinitiate a competition at a later date under new guidelines.
Background:
These grant programs were originally created through the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, passed in response to the Uvalde school shootings. The goal was to increase the pipeline of qualified school-based mental health professionals—including school psychologists, counselors, and social workers—particularly in high-need communities.
Many of the existing grants were part of multi-year funding cycles that supported both in-service and pre-service training. The abrupt cancellation creates significant disruption, particularly for pre-service professionals who are now at risk of losing funding midway through graduate or certification programs—potentially compromising their ability to complete required clinical hours and become fully licensed.
Why This Matters: Mental Health Grant Cancellations
The cancellation of the School-Based Mental Health Services and Mental Health Service Professionals Demonstration Grants guts a critical funding pipeline intended to address the national youth mental health crisis. These programs were established after a tragedy and have already been instrumental in placing thousands of counselors, social workers, and school psychologists into high-need schools.
By halting these grants midway through multi-year awards, the Department is effectively derailing in-progress graduate training, leaving students without funding to finish licensure requirements and schools without incoming support. The stated rationale—that the programs don’t align with the Administration’s civil rights interpretation—raises serious questions about whether future mental health funding will prioritize ideological alignment over evidence-based practice.
This disruption jeopardizes the mental health infrastructure of public schools at a time when youth depression, anxiety, and suicide ideation are at record levels. Without continuity of funding or a clear relaunch timeline, schools, universities, and families are left in a state of uncertainty—and our students may be left without help when they need it most.
What’s Next:
ED has stated that it intends to redesign the programs and relaunch a new competition, though no clear timeline has been provided. In the meantime, institutions and students alike face deep uncertainty around how to continue this critical pipeline work.
As faculty, researchers, and scholars dedicated to preparing the next generation of special educators and advancing evidence-based practice, your voice is essential. These policy shifts threaten the infrastructure that supports rigorous teacher preparation, doctoral training, and the research that drives our field forward. Now is the time to advocate—not only for your programs and your students, but for the children and families who rely on a strong, well-prepared special education workforce. Share your stories. Lift up your data. Engage with policymakers.
Your expertise and experience are powerful tools—and the future of our field depends on them.
With appreciation and resolve,
Kait
@brennan_kait
