On March 20, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order No. 4242, which said, “…the experiment of controlling American education through Federal programs and dollars—and the unaccountable bureaucracy those programs and dollars support—has plainly failed our children, our teachers, and our families.” That order initiated a period of speculation about how it would be used to implement the administration’s pledge to shutter the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) and return education to the states. Speculation is no longer needed—action has been implemented.
While an act of Congress is required to completely abolish the department, the U.S. Secretary of Education, Linda McMahon, began its demise by processes of staff attrition and transfer of program administration.
The reduction in staff (RIF) has resulted in the elimination of more than half of the 4,000 employees. Many of the remaining staff members who oversee dozens of education programs have little or no experience, yet they are now making decisions that impact all students and teachers. Shifting program administration to the state education departments (SEAs) is being promoted through encouraging SEAs to apply for waivers from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Title program regulations. Title funding is administered categorically and separately, but waivers could allow an SEA to combine all funds if it would enhance the quality of teaching and student outcomes. The president’s budget proposal includes the K-12 Simplified Funding Program (SFP), which would merge 18 separate federal grant programs into a single state formula grant, reducing the total funding from $6.5 billion to $2.5 billion. Consolidation methods that allocate funds directly to states and local districts to give them more flexibility in addressing their specific needs could pose challenges for Catholic and other private schools if the provisions for equitable services, which guarantee their participation, are not clearly outlined in each proposal.
On November 18, 2025, the department announced new partnerships with other federal agencies to “break up the federal education bureaucracy to ensure efficient delivery of funded programs and activities.” Using the Interagency Agreement (IAA) framework, the department has authority to enter into contracts with other agencies to provide services and programs on their behalf. Key transfers include sending the administration of most elementary and secondary education programs to the Department of Labor, Indian Education to the Department of the Interior, and early childcare access and foreign medical international education to the Department of State.
Under a partnership agreement, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) will assume the role of administering most ESEA K-12 elementary and secondary programs currently managed by the education department’s Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE). The rationale given for transfer to DOL is to “create a cohesive, unified strategy for talent development to build a workforce for the Golden Age of America...and ensure better alignment between education outcomes and workforce needs.”
The Elementary and Secondary Education programs that private schools are eligible to participate in that are included in the DOL transfer are: Title I, Part A: Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies; Title I, Part C: Education of Migratory Children; Title II, Part A: Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants; Title III, Part A: English Language Acquisition State Grants; Title IV, Part A, Student Support and Academic Enrichment (SSAE); and Title IV, Part B 21st Century Community Learning Centers. Technically, to be compliant with the law, DOE must maintain oversight of all programs, but what that oversight will look like has not been explained.
The current exception to this move is the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) program for students with special needs. While this program was not listed among transfers, work is ongoing to shift this $15 billion to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) soon after it addresses the issues raised by advocates for special needs students that HHS has the infrastructure to provide a free and appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment for all.
[We] are left to wonder how dealing with at least three agencies new to education programs and 50 different state education departments will improve private school student and teacher access to programs in which they have statutory inclusion.
The department has stated that funding for federal education programs should not be affected. Since all education programs are forward funded, the SEAs and LEAs received their ESEA allocations this summer after the Government Accountability Office (GOA) rescinded the delays. For this year, schools should have begun the consultation process for receiving equitable services as they have usually done. Nothing has changed for this year in that regard. If a school is in a state or district that receives a waiver, the LEA is still required to provide equitable services. By law, equitable services are the one piece of the statute that cannot be waived. All the ESEA programs are still overseen by the state ombudsman, whose role is to monitor and enforce compliance with equitable services requirements. The ombudsman should be the first point of contact for private school officials if difficulties arise.
As these programs shift to other agencies, there are many questions to be addressed. For the private school community, the primary one is how the agency will address equitable services when the agency has not worked in that realm. Most federal agencies provide direct grants to applicants, not services. To avoid that scenario, the original ESEA bill of 1965 created the child benefit and public trusteeship structure that does not allow direct funds to flow to private schools. The local public school district receives all funds and administers them on behalf of the eligible students and teachers in the private school. This ensures that no public money flows to the private school and that it does not become a recipient of federal financial assistance and subject to public school regulations. How will the DOL and other agencies ensure continuity as they administer the program funds? That function has played a key role for the Office of Non-Public Education (ONPE) within the education department. Concern about what the role of ONPE will be and how its role will be retained or replicated in other agencies has been a conversation in meetings at DOE and with education committee members of Congress, as private school representatives advocate to retain that function in whatever new configurations emerge.
While the DOE pursues these new partnerships with other federal agencies to “break up the federal education bureaucracy to ensure efficient delivery of funded programs and activities,” we are left to wonder how dealing with at least three agencies new to education programs and 50 different state education departments will improve private school student and teacher access to programs in which they have statutory inclusion. Know that NCEA will be working with others in the private school community to collaborate with officials at DOE and DOL to offer advice and insights regarding the different but equally important rights and needs of our school communities.
Sister Dale McDonald, PBVM, Ph.D.is the vice president of public policy for NCEA.McDonald@ncea.org