What downsizing the Department of Education means for equal opportunity 

On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced it was putting nearly half of the Department of Education’s (ED) staff on administrative leave. “Today’s reduction in force reflects the Department of Education’s commitment to efficiency, accountability, and ensuring that resources are directed where they matter most: to students, parents, and teachers,” said Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. 

The nation’s disadvantaged students have been the focus of federal elementary and secondary education programs for over half a century. Downsizing ED raises important questions about their future. 

The move signals the administration’s commitment to broader reforms that have the potential to help millions of children access better learning opportunities. Moreover, reducing staffing at the department will likely have minimal impact on the nation’s elementary and secondary students in the short run.

Most of ED’s K-12 programs involve formula funds, particularly Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Congress provided $19 billion for Title I and $15 billion for IDEA in FY2024. These funds flow to school districts and state education agencies. Along with these programs, ED also announced that it will continue to administer its core postsecondary student aid programs: Pell Grants and student loans.

It’s not yet clear which offices and programs within ED will be affected by the workforce reduction. Some areas within the department provide significant value for disadvantaged students including the research and statistical collection programs within the Institute of Education Sciences. These valuable programs maintain transparency in K-12 education and identify best-practices. Additionally, civil rights enforcement—such as the recently announced investigation into potential discrimination in the District of Columbia’s special education programs—provide important checks on school abuse. 

However, with these exceptions, it’s unlikely that reduced staffing at the ED headquarters will affect K-12 students, since most of the agency’s role involves distributing funding to states, local school systems, and other grantees. While these job losses are regrettable, the department’s programs have little to no impact on what happens in the nation’s K-12 classrooms on a daily basis. 

President Trump and Secretary McMahon can pursue substantive reform to the ESEA and IDEA, ideally through legislation. President Trump already issued an executive order directing federal agencies to expand educational opportunities, which instructed ED to “issue guidance on how the states can use federal funding formulas to support their K-12 scholarship programs.” Secretary McMahon can use her authority to issue waivers to grant state education leaders more autonomy and encourage states to use existing funds to expand parental choice. 

But to truly benefit the nation’s disadvantaged students and children with special needs, Secretary McMahon should work with Congress to enact statutory reforms that transfer resources and decisionmaking power from state education agencies and school districts directly to students and parents.

The House Education and Workforce Committee heard powerful testimony from Jenny Clark, an Arizona parent and non-profit leader. She described how her public school district did not offer adequate services under IDEA to her children who were diagnosed with severe dyslexia and dysgraphia. Instead, Clark applied for Arizona’s empowerment scholarship program, which provides state-funded education savings accounts (ESA) to parents: 

This changed everything for my boys and for my family. With the $7,500 ESA scholarship we accessed dyslexia remediation at Dyslexia Pros Arizona and dysgraphia support at Scribble to Script. We finally had access to a variety of dyslexia specific educational resources, audio books, and amazing online programs, like Synthesis School, that boosted their confidence as they progressed in their reading and writing. I could go on and on about the incredible educational resources the ESA program has made possible for our family. The ESA scholarship has been truly transformative in shaping the trajectory of my children’s future. According to the latest NAEP scores, tens of millions of children across the country cannot read proficiently. It is a national crisis. Like my boys, I know many of these children would benefit tremendously from an ESA.

Congress and the Trump administration should reform ESEA and IDEA to enable parental choice like Arizona’s ESA program does. Title I of ESEA could provide funds directly to students through an ESA. IDEA could be reformed to require states to provide parents with a right of exit if their public school cannot provide adequate services, which could spur more states to offer ESAs. As the Trump administration streamlines bureaucracy and overhead costs, the savings could be rolled into direct support provided to the nation’s disadvantaged children and special education students.