Student protesters shout during a “Hands Off Our Schools” rally in front of the U.S. Department of Education’s Washington, D.C., headquarters in April. Students from several colleges and universities gathered to protest President Donald Trump’s efforts to dismantle the department. (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Democrats on Tuesday blasted ongoing efforts from President Donald Trump’s administration to dismantle the Department of Education, including plans to shift several of its responsibilities to other Cabinet-level agencies.
Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono hosted a forum on the issue with several Democratic colleagues. The lawmakers, joined by education leaders, advocates and leading labor union voices, said the restructuring would lead to a loss of expertise, create more bureaucracy and weaken support for students and families.
The administration announced six agreements in November with the departments of Labor, Interior, Health and Human Services and State as part of a larger effort from the administration to dismantle the 46-year-old Education Department.
Trump has sought to axe the agency in his quest to send education “back to the states” and tapped Education Secretary Linda McMahon to fulfill that mission. Much of the funding and oversight of schools already occurs at the state and local levels.
Losing expertise
Sen. Elizabeth Warren slammed the transfers as “illegal” because of federal laws assigning specific responsibilities to the Education Department.
“Congress already passed the laws on this,” she said. “Every one of the programs that’s moving out of the Department of Education specifically says we have allocated the money for a program in the Department of Education, not in whatever random other place Secretary McMahon decides to put it.”
The Massachusetts Democrat said that if the transfers go through, “we’ve got now four federal agencies that have no experience with education suddenly in charge of more than 50 different educational programs, including ones that fund literacy, education for veterans, kids in rural school districts — you name it, it’s moving somewhere else.”
Even before the announcements of interagency agreements, the Education Department had seen several changes since Trump took office, including layoffs of hundreds of employees that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in July could temporarily proceed.
In a late Tuesday statement to States Newsroom, department spokesperson Madi Biedermann said the transfers were part of a wider effort to initiate a sorely needed overhaul of the federal education bureaucracy.
“The opposition is protecting a system that produces dismal results for our students,” she said. “The Trump Administration demands better than the status quo.”
‘Nothing but chaos’
Under one of the agreements, the Education Department said the Labor Department would take on a “greater role” in administering elementary and secondary education programs currently managed under the Education Department’s Office of Elementary and Secondary Education.
Rachel Gittleman, president of American Federation of Government Employees Local 252, which represents Education Department workers, said “nobody wins, the least of all, students and educators,” when the Labor Department takes on massive education programs, noting the current workforce at Education has the right experience.
“Our staff have decades of experience with the complicated programs we’re talking about today,” Gittleman said. “These moves will cause nothing but chaos and harm for the people they’re intended to help.”
In general, the agreements “swap a highly efficient system for a chaotic, underfunded one spread across multiple agencies,” Gittleman said.
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, also rebuked the administration’s efforts to gut the agency.
“What is happening here is not simply the dismantlement of the Department of Education,” she said. “It is taking away — it is abandoning the federal role in education.”
Weingarten, who leads one of the largest teachers unions in the country, added that “we should be, as a nation, expanding the federal role in public education, not supplanting states.”
Rhode Island commissioner condemns Brown shooting
Angélica Infante-Green, Rhode Island’s commissioner of elementary and secondary education, said the administration’s attempts to gut the agency are “already putting our nation’s education system and our students at a disadvantage.”
Communication from the Department of Education “lacks detail,” she added.
“We get these one or two sentences with edicts that often conflict with state and federal law. What do we do? The chaos has resulted in protracted legal battles across the country, raising serious constitutional questions,” she said.
At the top of her remarks, Infante-Green also expressed her condolences for the victims, their families and the entire Brown University community after two students were killed and nine others were injured in a shooting on campus over the weekend.
The U.S. Education Department announced a proposed agreement with Republican-led states to permanently eliminate the Biden-era SAVE plan. (Catherine Lane/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education announced a proposed agreement Tuesday that would permanently axe an income-driven student loan repayment plan in which more than 7 million student loan borrowers are enrolled.
Under a joint proposal with seven Republican-led states that challenged the program, the department would not enroll any new borrowers in the Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE, plan, deny any pending applications and place borrowers currently in the plan into legally compliant repayment plans.
The program, introduced in 2023 under then-President Joe Biden’s administration, was hit with legal challenges from several GOP-led states, including Missouri, and has been blocked by the courts. The initiative sought to provide lower monthly loan payments for borrowers and forgive remaining debt after a certain period of time.
If a Missouri federal court approves the agreement, the department said borrowers currently enrolled in the SAVE plan “will have a limited time to select a new, legal repayment plan and begin repaying their student loans.”
The agreement stems from a legal challenge to the plan brought by Missouri, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, North Dakota, Ohio and Oklahoma in 2024.
A ‘deceptive scheme’
In a statement alongside the announcement, Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent said President Donald Trump’s administration “is righting this wrong and bringing an end to this deceptive scheme.”
“The law is clear: if you take out a loan, you must pay it back,” Kent added. “Thanks to the State of Missouri and other states fighting against this egregious federal overreach, American taxpayers can now rest assured they will no longer be forced to serve as collateral for illegal and irresponsible student loan policies.”
Republicans argued the permissive repayment plan let borrowers off the hook at the expense of federal taxpayers.
Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway said in a statement Tuesday her office “fought for hardworking Americans who were being preyed upon by Biden Administration bureaucrats, and we won in court every time.”
“We appreciate President Trump’s real, long-term solutions instead of illegal student loan schemes,” Hanaway added.
Student advocates, though, said the agreement would place an additional burden on student borrowers already struggling with a rising cost of living.
Persis Yu, deputy executive director and managing counsel at the advocacy group Protect Borrowers, blasted the settlement agreement as “pure capitulation” in a Tuesday statement.
“While millions of student loan borrowers struggle amidst the worsening affordability crisis … billionaire Education Secretary, Linda McMahon chose to strike a back-room deal with a right-wing state Attorney General and strip borrowers of the most affordable repayment plan that would help millions to stay on track with their loans while keeping a roof over their head,” Yu said.
Interest accumulating
In February, a federal appeals court upheld a lower court injunction that blocked the SAVE plan from going into effect. Borrowers under the plan were placed in an interest-free forbearance last year amid legal limbo.
But borrowers’ loans in the SAVE forbearance began to accrue interest Aug. 1 — a move the department announced in July to comply with court orders.
The SAVE plan was already set to be phased out by July 2028 under congressional Republicans’ tax and spending cut bill that Trump signed into law this year.
Nurse practitioner Carol Biocic treats a Marine Corps veteran at a podiatry clinic for veterans in 2023 in Chicago. New professional student loan caps might make it more difficult for people to pursue advanced nursing degrees. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)
Zoe Clarke became a hospital registered nurse two and a half years ago, following in the footsteps of her mother and grandmother.
Clarke, an ICU nurse in Asheville, North Carolina, wants to get her master’s degree to become a nurse practitioner or a certified registered nurse anesthetist — occupations in high demand — and eventually work toward a doctoral degree.
But new borrowing limits on federal student loans may hinder her from reaching that goal.
A provision in the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the tax and spending law enacted this summer, overhauls the federal student loan program for graduate students in an effort to simplify the loan process and discourage colleges from raising tuition.
To comply with the new law, the U.S. Department of Education recently issued a draft rule that would impose limits on how much graduate students can borrow — up to $20,500 per year and $100,000 in total for most students, but up to $50,000 a year and $200,000 in total for students in a new “professional” category. The category includes people studying to be medical doctors, dentists, veterinarians, pharmacists and lawyers.
Students pursuing advanced nursing degrees, however, are not included in the professional category.
Advanced practice nurses, hospital associations and other health groups say the rule will make it unaffordable for many nurses to advance their careers — disproportionately affecting communities, especially rural ones, that rely on them amid physician shortages.
Advanced nurses can provide primary care, deliver babies as nurse midwives and anesthetize surgery patients where there aren’t enough physicians to go around. They can also write some prescriptions. Advanced practice nurses also serve as college faculty in community colleges and nursing schools.
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates the nation will employ an additional 134,000 nurse practitioners, nurse midwives and nurse anesthetists in the next decade, 35% more than there are now. In high demand, nurse practitioners are one of the fastest-growing occupations in the nation, the bureau says.
“We depend heavily on nurse practitioners,” said Sandy Reding, a president of the California Nurses Association and vice president of National Nurses United. “But if they don’t have access to getting further education, we’re not going to see additional nurse practitioners come into the field.”
Tuition, combined with living expenses, can far exceed $50,000 a year for many post-bachelor’s nursing programs.
“Potentially, this could devastate a whole generation of nurses getting their advanced practice degrees,” Clarke said.
Some education advocates fear that losing a pipeline of advanced nursing practitioners to serve as college faculty also could lead to fewer registered and advanced nurses and other caregivers with two- and four-year degrees, because there would be fewer people to teach them.
It’s a slap in the face to the nurses that go to work every day doing our very best to care for our patients.
– Sandy Reding, a president of the California Nurses Association
Many advanced-degree nursing faculty are retiring. Nursing schools reported more than 2,100 full-time faculty vacancies in 2022, according to the American Nurses Association — leading to roughly 80,000 students being turned away.
States are already grappling with workforce shortfalls caused by exhausting work conditions that have led many nurses to burn out and leave the field, or leave bedside care to teach, nurses told Stateline.
In response to an uproar from nursing associations and others in health care, the Department of Education released a rebuttal last week defending its proposal, saying it is not a “value judgement about the importance of programs.”
It also said it may make changes in response to public comments. The new limits would take effect July 1, 2026.
Rural and underserved communities
Advanced practice registered nurses, known as APRNs, fill gaps in rural communities where there aren’t enough clinicians. For example, nurses needed for surgeries — nurse anesthetists, or CRNAs — make up 80% of anesthesia providers in rural counties. About a fifth of APRNs nationwide worked in rural areas in 2022, according to one survey of more than 18,800 APRNs.
“The nurse practitioners, APRNs, are a needed lifeline to help fill those gaps,” said Heidi Lucas, executive director of the Missouri Rural Health Association and former director of the state’s nurses association. “Putting barriers in the way to keep [nurses] from getting degrees — that’s just going to exacerbate the problems that we already have.”
She said Missouri will be short about 2,000 physicians next year.
The new rule cutting options for federal student loans would only worsen staffing shortages amid tenuous rural hospital budgets, said state-level observers. Hospitals already are grappling with millions of dollars in looming Medicaid cuts over the next 10 years, said Rich Rasmussen, president of the Oklahoma Hospital Association.
Nurse practitioners often serve as primary care providers, writing prescriptions and managing patient care. About 80% of them see Medicaid and Medicare patients, according to the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, citing federal data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
The proposal to deny advanced practice nurse practitioners the more generous loan options ignores the nation’s needs, said nurse practitioner Valerie Fuller, president of the association.
“At a time when America needs more health care providers, we can’t afford to put more obstacles in place for nurse practitioner students who want to go on and further their education and take care of the patients that need care,” said Fuller, former president of the Maine Nurse Practitioner Association. “We know it’s going to harm our workforce.”
‘Clipping the wings’
Rasmussen, of the Oklahoma Hospital Association, said he is concerned about the effect the rule will have on the pipeline for certified nurse midwives and the state’s already dwindling rural maternal health care options.
“We are clipping the wings of rural [obstetrics] to be able to blossom in our state if we’re going to put these types of restrictions on the borrowing capability of nurses who want to pursue obstetrical services in nursing as well,” he said. He added that the rules will force nurses to seek private sector loans — which don’t qualify for federal loan forgiveness programs that encourage clinicians to come work in rural areas.
Teshieka Curtis-Pugh, executive director of the South Carolina Nurses Association, is also concerned about nurse midwives. South Carolina is expected to see a shortage of 3,200 physicians by 2030.
“We also live in a state that has very poor maternal outcomes, especially for women of color. So think about, how does that impact them?” she said. “That means we don’t get the certified nurse midwives who are masters prepared, some of them are doctorally prepared, who are able to fill that gap for birth in that area.”
Diversity and opportunity for students from marginalized groups could also take a hit, said Curtis-Pugh, a registered nurse with a master’s of science in nursing. And for those going back to school while juggling parenting, federal loan dollars can help beyond tuition, she noted.
“They help that mom be able to supplement child care for their child, so that they can have child care while they go to school,” she said. “There’s tuition, there’s books, there’s keeping the lights on. They’re feeding the family they’re getting to and from.”
The exclusion from the higher, “professional” category of student loan options is especially galling after nurses’ work during the COVID-19 pandemic, said Reding, of National Nurses United.
“We were all heroes in 2020. Now, what are we?” Reding asked. “It’s a slap in the face to the nurses that go to work every day doing our very best to care for our patients, even under very adverse conditions and even facing deadly viruses.”
Zoe Clarke, a registered nurse in Asheville, North Carolina, said new proposed student loan caps may disrupt many nurses’ plans, including her own, to become nurse practitioners. (Photo courtesy of National Nurses United)
Clarke, the registered nurse considering a post-bachelor’s degree, said nurses’ pandemic-era devotion influenced her own career path.
“When I saw the nurses and the health care workers really working hard for their communities and sacrificing a lot, I was really inspired by that,” Clarke said. “And that’s why I went to school.”
This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Wisconsin Examiner, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
Student protesters shout during a “Hands Off Our Schools” rally in front of the U.S. Department of Education building in Washington, D.C., in April. The same group held a virtual press conference Tuesday to protest President Donald Trump’s efforts to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education. (Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON — A pair of Democratic lawmakers joined student leaders Tuesday in blasting President Donald Trump’s ongoing efforts to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education.
U.S. Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts and U.S. Rep. Lauren Underwood of Illinois, alongside college and high school students from across the United States, rebuked the Trump administration’s plans to shift several of the Education Department’s responsibilities to other Cabinet-level agencies as part of a larger effort to abolish the 46-year-old Education Department.
Markey said Trump’s and Education Secretary Linda McMahon’s “dismantling of the department will have immediate negative consequences for students, for families, for local schools nationwide,” during a virtual press conference organized by “Hands Off Our Schools,” a coalition encompassing student government leaders from Washington, D.C.
“When a parent or superintendent needs support or technical assistance, there will be no one to pick up the phone,” he said.
McMahon defended the move at a Nov. 20 White House press briefing, saying “these interagency agreements to cut our own bureaucratic bloat are a key step in our efforts to shift educational authority from Washington, D.C., to your state education agency, your local superintendent, your local school board — entities that are accountable to you.”
But Markey and Underwood said the administration’s moves would have deeply negative impacts.
“The Trump agenda to destroy the Department of Education is not about cutting red tape — it is about enacting cruelty and intentionally breaking the programs that ensure the promise of education is delivered to every single student,” Markey said.
Underwood said “this administration’s attacks on our Department of Education are part of a much larger assault on the very foundations of our constitutional rights and our democracy.”
She added that “by tearing down the Department of Education, this administration has made an explicit choice to abandon students and families.”
Underwood — who is a registered nurse — also took aim at the department’s proposal stemming from congressional Republicans’ “big, beautiful” law that would place stricter loan limits on students pursuing graduate nursing programs because they would not fall under the “professional” degree classification.
She said the effort is “devastating for our already overburdened nursing workforce, and it’s a disaster for our health care system, especially in rural communities.”
‘Brainless decision’
Students from California, Texas, Virginia and Washington, D.C., also slammed the department’s plans to transfer responsibilities to other agencies and potential impacts on marginalized students.
“This brainless decision to shift programs out of the (Education Department) is targeting the most vulnerable among us,” Darius Wagner, a student at Georgetown University, said, describing the move as “unnecessarily cruel.”
“Other federal departments that now (bear) this responsibility do not have the resources, staff or expertise to manage these programs and will inevitably mismanage resources that will leave our most vulnerable children behind,” Wagner added.
Ayaan Moledina, a high school student in Austin, Texas, said “dismantling and destroying the department will lead to major consequences on the success of marginalized students.”
Moledina, who serves as federal policy director of the advocacy group Students Engaged in Advancing Texas (SEAT), said that “without a federal department, there will be no federal oversight of institutions to guarantee the basic and fundamental rights of students.”
He added: “There will be no federal assistance for institutions to implement federally mandated programs, putting more of a burden on schools that already have their plates full.”
Six interagency agreements
The agreements to transfer several of the Education Department’s responsibilities to four other departments drew swift condemnation from Democratic officials, labor unions and advocacy groups, who questioned the legality of the effort and voiced concerns about the harm that would be imposed on students, families and schools as a result.
The Education Department clarified that it would “maintain all statutory responsibilities and will continue its oversight of these programs” regarding its six agreements signed with Labor, Interior, Health and Human Services and State.
Prior to the six announced interagency agreements, the agency had already undergone a slew of changes that the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily greenlit in July, including mass layoffs that gutted more than 1,300 employees and a plan to dramatically downsize the department ordered earlier this year.
The Lyndon Baines Johnson Department of Education Building pictured in November 2024. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)
WASHINGTON — A coalition suing to block President Donald Trump’s efforts to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education expanded its lawsuit Tuesday to include objections to recent interagency agreements to shift the department’s responsibilities to other Cabinet-level agencies.
The alliance of unions and school districts also added a major disability rights advocacy group to its ranks in the amended complaint that detailed how the department’s Nov. 18 announcement of six interagency agreements could harm students.
The agreements to transfer several Education responsibilities to four other departments drew swift backlash from Democratic officials, labor unions and advocacy groups, who questioned the legality of the transfers and expressed concerns over the harms that would be imposed on students, families and schools as a result.
“Scattering Department of Education programs among agencies with no expertise in education or lacking key agency infrastructure will reduce the efficiency and effectiveness of these programs and will prevent the type of synergy that Congress intended to achieve by consolidating federal education activities in one cabinet level agency,” the coalition, represented by the legal advocacy group Democracy Forward, wrote in the amended complaint.
The expanded suit asks for declaratory and injunctive relief against what it describes as the administration’s “unlawful effort to dismantle the Department of Education,” pointing to the interagency agreements, mass layoffs at the department earlier this year and implementation of an executive order that called on Education Secretary Linda McMahon to facilitate the closure of her own department.
The Education Department clarified in fact sheets related to the agreements with the departments of Labor, Interior, Health and Human Services and State that it would “maintain all statutory responsibilities and will continue its oversight of these programs.”
Axing the Education Department
Trump has sought to take an axe to the 46-year-old department, saying he wants to send education “back to the states.” Much of the funding and oversight of schools already occurs at the state and local levels.
The original lawsuit, filed in March in Massachusetts federal court, was brought by the American Federation of Teachers, its Massachusetts chapter, AFSCME Council 93, the American Association of University Professors, the Service Employees International Union and two school districts in Massachusetts.
The Tuesday filing adds The Arc of the United States, an advocacy group for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, as a plaintiff.
Earlier this year, the case was consolidated with another March lawsuit from Democratic attorneys general in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington state and Wisconsin.
“It’s no surprise that blue states and unions care more about preserving the DC bureaucracy than about giving parents, students, and teachers more control over education and improving the efficient delivery of funds and services,” Madi Biedermann, a spokesperson for the department, said in a statement shared with States Newsroom.
A federal appeals court upheld that order in June, prompting the administration to ask the Supreme Court to intervene.
The nation’s highest court in July temporarily suspended the lower courts’ orders, allowing the administration to proceed, for now, with those dismantling efforts.
This story was originally published by ProPublica.
Following public outcry, the U.S. Department of Education has restored funding for students who have both hearing and vision loss, about a month after cutting it.
But rather than sending the money directly to the four programs that are part of a national network helping students who are deaf and blind, a condition known as deafblindness, the department has instead rerouted the grants to a different organization that will provide funding for those vulnerable students.
The Trump administration targeted the programs in its attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion; a department spokesperson had cited concerns about “divisive concepts” and “fairness” in explaining the decision to withhold the funding.
ProPublica and other news organizations reported last month on the canceled grants to agencies that serve these students in Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin, as well as in five states that are part of a New England consortium.
Programs then appealed to the Education Department to retain their funding, but the appeals were denied. Last week, the National Center on Deafblindness, the parent organization of the agencies that were denied, told the four programs that the Education Department had provided it with additional grant money and the center was passing it on to them.
“This will enable families, schools, and early intervention programs to continue to … meet the unique needs of children who are deafblind,” according to the letter from the organization to the agencies, which was provided to ProPublica. Education Department officials did not respond to questions from ProPublica; automatic email replies cited the government shutdown.
When the funding was canceled, the programs were in the middle of a five-year grant that was expected to continue through September 2028. The funding from the center is only for one year.
“We don’t know what will happen” in future years, said Lisa McConachie of the Oregon DeafBlind Project, which serves 114 students in the state. McConachie said that with uncertain funding, her agency had to cancel a retreat this fall that had been organized for parents to swap medical equipment, share resources and learn about services to help students when they get older. She hopes to reschedule it for the spring.
“It is still a disruption to families,’’ she said. “It creates this mistrust, that you are gone and back and gone and back.”
Oregon’s grant application for its deafblind program, submitted in 2023, included a statement about its commitment to address “inequities, racism, bias” and the marginalization of disability groups, language that was encouraged by the Biden administration. It also attached the strategic plan for Portland Public Schools, where the Oregon DeafBlind Project is headquartered, that mentioned the establishment of a Center for Black Student Excellence — which is unrelated to the deafblind project. The Education Department’s letter said that those initiatives were “in conflict with agency policy and priorities.”
An advocate for deafblind students said he was happy to see the funding restored but called the department’s decision-making “amateurish” and disruptive to students and families. “It is mean-spirited to do this to families and kids and school systems at the beginning of the year when all of these things should be so smooth,” said Maurice Belote, co-chair of the National DeafBlind Coalition, which advocates for legislation that supports deafblind children and young adults.
Grants to the four agencies total about $1 million a year. The department started funding state-level programs to help deafblind students more than 40 years ago in response to the rubella epidemic in the late 1960s. Nationally, there are about 10,000 children and young adults, from infants to 21-year-olds, who are deafblind and more than 1,000 in the eight affected states, according to the National Center on Deafblindness.
While the population is small, it is among the most complex to serve; educators rely on the deafblindness programs for support and training.
ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.
Analysis on upcoming TSD Conference education, National Association for Pupil Transportation election results, the Federal Brake for Kids Act and the Federal Communications Commission revoking E-Rate eligibility of school bus Wi-Fi.
Jeff Cassell, president of the School Bus Safety Company, discusses the need for safety leadership training, removing risk and reducing accidents in student transportation.
Glenna Wright-Gallo, vice president of policy at neurotechnology software company Everway, has worked at the state government level and served as the assistant secretary for the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services. At the TSD Conference this November, she brings her perspective as a person with a disability on educating and empowering individuals with disabilities.
Reading Time: 7minutesClick here to read highlights from the story
Alverno College, Herzing University, Gateway Technical College and Mount Mary University could lose millions of dollars in aid after the U.S. Department of Education announced plans to end grant programs it deemed unconstitutional.
The grant programs offer federal aid to colleges and universities where designated shares of students are Black, Native American, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, Asian American or Pacific Islander.
The Wisconsin colleges that would see the greatest impact are Hispanic-serving institutions, which means at least 25% of their students are Hispanic, among other requirements.
Experts say the grant programs were meant to level the playing field, and colleges often created supports with the federal funding that affect students of all demographics.
In addition, several Wisconsin colleges that could soon become Hispanic-serving institutions told Wisconsin Watch they plan to continue to pursue the designation.
Wisconsin colleges and universities with significant Hispanic and Latino populations could lose millions after the U.S. Department of Education announced that it plans to end several long-standing grant programs it says violate the Constitution.
In Wisconsin, the change would affect Alverno College, Herzing University, Gateway Technical College and Mount Mary University.
The seven grant programs in question award money to minority-serving schools for things like tutoring, research opportunities, counseling or campus facilities.
The funds are available only to schools where a designated share of students are Black, Native American, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, Asian American or Pacific Islander, though the money can be used for initiatives that serve students of all demographics at those schools.
“Discrimination based upon race or ethnicity has no place in the United States,” U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said in a statement. “The Department looks forward to working with Congress to reenvision these programs to support institutions that serve underprepared or under-resourced students without relying on race quotas.”
The $350 million previously allocated for grants for the 2025-26 school year will be “reprogrammed” to programs that “advance Administration priorities,” the department said.
The department will also discontinue existing grants, meaning schools that were previously awarded multi-year funding will not receive any remaining payments.
The largest share of the affected schools are Hispanic-serving institutions, including four in Wisconsin. More than 600 colleges hold that designation, which the Department of Education has awarded for about 30 years to colleges that meet several qualifications including having an undergraduate student body that’s at least 25% Hispanic.
The announcement does not affect funding for tribal colleges or historically Black colleges. The Department of Education announced $495 million in additional one-time funding for historically Black colleges and for tribal colleges.
It’s unclear how much funding Wisconsin’s schools stand to lose in total. The newest on the list, Gateway Technical College, applied for funding for the first time in July, seeking $2.8 million over five years, spokesperson Lee Colony said. The school was still waiting for a decision when the department announced it was canceling the program.
Wisconsin’s other three Hispanic-serving institutions did not answer questions from Wisconsin Watch.
The list also includes both of Wisconsin’s women-only schools, Mount Mary University and Alverno College, the latter of which has recently faced money troubles. Its board of directors declared a financial emergency in 2024. After cutting 14 majors, six graduate programs and dozens of staff and faculty, the school and its accreditor say it’s now in a stronger financial position, but the school did not respond to further questions.
The cuts could be especially consequential in Wisconsin because the state’s minority-serving institutions are smaller schools with smaller budgets, said Marybeth Gasman, executive director of the Rutgers Center for Minority Serving Institutions.
“If they lose funding, it will hurt students — especially low-income and first-generation college students,” Gasman said.
But the announcement doesn’t necessarily seal the fate of these grant programs. Gasman anticipates lawsuits over the funds that were already awarded to institutions, on the grounds that the administration can’t rescind funds that Congress has allotted.
“My hope is that Congress will step in and support these important institutions,” Gasman said.
Meanwhile, the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities released a statement calling the decision “an attack on equity in higher education” that “erases decades of progress and hurts millions of students.”
The organization said it would “continue to fight alongside students and institutions to defend these essential programs and ensure that opportunity, equity and investment in higher education are not rolled back.”
The case for HSIs
More than two-thirds of all Latino undergrads attend a Hispanic-serving institution, according to the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities. Proponents of the grant program say it helps a group of students who haven’t always been well supported in U.S. schools and colleges, and that, in turn, helps the economy.
“There are communities that have been excluded from educational opportunity, and they deserve the right to a high-quality education. That’s what democracy looks like,” said Anthony Hernandez, an education policy researcher at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who studies Hispanic-serving institutions.
“By concentrating these federal resources, we can help them gain momentum to get into white-collar pathways and imagine that they could become nurses, they can become doctors, captains of industry, they can become scientists,” he said.
Hernandez disputes the Department of Education’s claim that it’s discriminatory to set aside funds specifically for minority-serving institutions.
“For most of U.S. history, minority students were either explicitly excluded from higher education or funneled into segregated, underfunded schools,” Hernandez said.
Minority-serving institutions were created to level the playing field, which remains slanted by bias, economic inequality and disparities in funding across K-12 schools, he said.
“This policy change presents itself as a defense of fairness, but effectively punishes institutions that were created to repair unfairness,” Hernandez said. “It withdraws critical support from communities still facing barriers and undermines the very schools helping to expand opportunity and strengthen the economy.”
He argues the program should be grown, not dismantled. The number of Hispanic-serving institutions has soared, he said, and the available funds haven’t kept up.
“They’ve constantly had to fight for funding,” Hernandez said. “They’ve never been adequately funded.”
If the Department of Education succeeds at cutting these grant programs, he anticipates that graduation and transfer rates at these schools will drop.
The cuts so far don’t affect grants issued to minority-serving institutions by other departments, including the Department of Agriculture and the National Science Foundation. But Hernandez worries more cuts could be coming.
“We imagine that that is eventually going to encompass all of the different arteries of the federal government that dole out monies to the minority-serving institutions,” Hernandez said. “I don’t think it’s finished.”
Gasman agrees. “I think the Trump administration is challenging the entire MSI framework, which has had bipartisan support in Congress,” Gasman said.
Wisconsin colleges serve growing Hispanic population
Watching from the sidelines are eight other Wisconsin colleges that have spent years trying to become Hispanic-serving institutions. At those schools, designated by the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities as “Emerging Hispanic-Serving Institutions,” at least 15% of full-time undergrad students are Hispanic.
In the 2023-24 school year, there were 425 such schools in the U.S. In Wisconsin, the group includes a mix of private colleges, public universities and technical colleges.
They say they’ll keep up working to better serve Hispanic students even if the federal funds disappear.
Jeffrey Morin, president of the Milwaukee Institute of Art and Design. (Courtesy of the Milwaukee Institute of Art and Design)
The Milwaukee Institute of Art and Design joined the Emerging list in 2021, and its Hispanic enrollment has risen each year since, President Jeffrey Morin said.
About 19% of the incoming freshman class is Hispanic, and the city of Milwaukee is 20% Hispanic.
“For us, it is a natural reflection of the community that we serve,” Morin said, though he notes that the school selects students based on their academic record and a portfolio of their work, not their demographics.
“We are not sculpting a freshman class. We are serving the people who want to join our community,” Morin said. “And when a … noticeable portion of our population comes from a particular background, we want to make sure that we meet the needs of that population.”
Being designated as an Emerging Hispanic-serving institution hasn’t brought new funds to the school, but it “puts us in a community with other regional higher ed institutions so that … we can discuss and discover best practices and trends,” Morin said.
The Milwaukee Institute of Art and Design is an Emerging Hispanic-serving institution. (Courtesy of the Milwaukee Institute of Art and Design)
Hispanic students are the fastest-growing group in higher education. As their numbers boom, more Emerging schools could meet the 25% benchmark and become full-fledged Hispanic-serving institutions.
That’s the plan at the institute, Morin said, adding that the funds would help non-Hispanic students too. For example, he said, many Hispanic students are also the first in their families to go to college. The grant funds could be used for programs that would support first-generation students, regardless of their race or ethnicity.
“A rising tide lifts all boats,” Morin said. “The funding support that would come in to help one population will help other populations as well.”
‘Emerging’ schools not deterred
Despite recent news, MIAD officials say the school isn’t changing its plans. Supporting Hispanic students is particularly important now, Morin said, as the national rhetoric around immigrants grows increasingly hostile.
“What changes is that we’ll lose particular opportunities to partner (with the federal government) in service to the Hispanic community,” Morin said. “What doesn’t change is our commitment to serving the Hispanic community. We will simply look for new partners in that work.”
A student at the Milwaukee Institute of Art and Design uses virtual reality goggles in a studio on the college’s campus. (Courtesy of the Milwaukee Institute of Art and Design)
Several other Emerging institutions expressed similar sentiments.
The mission of the federal program “aligns with our Catholic, Jesuit mission to keep a Marquette education accessible to all,” said Marquette University spokesperson Kevin Conway. The university announced in 2016 that it intended to become a Hispanic-serving institution. Since then, the Hispanic share of its student body has grown from 10% to about 16% in fall 2024.
“Like all colleges and universities, Marquette is monitoring changes in the higher education landscape and the resources available to help the students we serve,” Conway said. “One thing that will not change is Marquette’s commitment to its mission and supporting our community.”
A spokesperson for the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, where about 15% of students are Hispanic, said the school “remains steadfast in its access mission, ensuring higher education is attainable for all, regardless of background or income.”
Milwaukee Area Technical College, meanwhile, announced last year that it was “on the verge” of achieving full HSI status with 23.4% of its full-time students identifying as Hispanic.
“We’re very, very close,” MATC President Anthony Cruz said at the time.
Asked about the latest developments, spokesperson Darryll Fortune said the school “will continue to pursue HSI status regardless.”
This story was updated to include an announcement made by the Department of Education that the agency will award historically Black colleges and tribal colleges $495 million in one-time funding.
Glenna Wright-Gallo’s upcoming keynote at the Transporting Students with Disabilities and Special Needs (TSD) Conference will feature her expertise in inclusive disability policies and background in work with special needs students to guide student transporters through the world of federal and state requirements.
Wright-Gallo’s will present her keynote, “Staying Mission-Focused: Leading Through Policy Shifts with Clarity and Confidence,” Sunday, Nov. 9 in Frisco, Texas. She recently served as the assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Education in the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), from May 2023 until February of this year. Her work there and most recently as vice president of policy at Everway, an educational software company, gives her unique insights into navigating accessible training programs, technology and updated policies regarding transportation services.
During her keynote, she looks to provide TSD Conference attendees with strategies to keep pace with implementing updated policies and ensure reliable and safe transportation services for students with disabilities, and infants and toddlers.
In addition to her keynote, Wright-Gallo is presenting a breakout session the afternoon of Nov. 9 on the importance and role of Dear Colleague Letters issued by the U.S. Department of Education.
Glenna Wright-Gallo is sworn in as the assistant secretary for the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education and Rehabilitation Services in May 2023. (Photo courtesy of Utah State University)
Wright-Gallo received her bachelor’s degree master’s degree in special education and teaching as well as a master’s in business administration. She became a special education teacher in 1997 and then served as the state director of special education at the Utah State Department of Education from 2010-2017. She then became an assistant superintendent at the Washington Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction for five years before President Joe Biden nominated her her U.S. Department of Education post in 2023.
Her work in Washington, D.C., included development of national policy, best practices for students with disabilities, recruitment of diverse personnel in special education and furthering state compliance to advance inclusive practices. At Everway, she is leading the Policy Center of Excellence and looks to amplify the voices of individuals with disabilities and people who are neurodivergent. She is also utilizing her experience in systems improvement to use neurotechnology software in the support of those with disabilities and further accessibility in education and workplaces.
Save $100 on main conference registration with the Early Bird Discount, available through Oct. 3. The TSD Conference will be held Nov. 6 through Nov. 11 at Embassy Suites Dallas-Frisco Hotel and Convention Center. Visit tsdconference.com to register and view the conference agenda, which includes four keynotes and dozens of educational sessions all focused on transportation of students with special needs.
A program at Marquette University that trains Milwaukee-area teachers to incorporate the city’s untold stories – particularly those of communities of color – into their classrooms is losing federal funding.
The U.S. Department of Education sent a letter that stated it will not continue the grant, saying the program – called MKE Roots – reflects “the prior administration’s priorities and policy preferences and conflict with those of the current administration.”
The decision means funding will end this fall, leading to staff cuts and scaling back of programming.
It’s a loss for the teachers who participate – but one that will affect thousands of Milwaukee students, said Melissa Gibson, faculty director of MKE Roots.
“Students realize that their communities have this whole rich history of organizing and advocating, making our city not only what it is but also a better place,” Gibson said. “They feel more empowered to be their own community and civic leaders.”
‘A rich tapestry of cultural experiences’
MKE Roots is a professional development program for Milwaukee-area teachers that includes a weeklong summer training in which they visit local landmarks and meet with historians and community leaders.
Places this summer included America’s Black Holocaust Museum and Sherman Phoenix Marketplace.
Before the school year begins, teachers get help developing lesson plans that reflect what they’ve learned, then they meet at least four more times to collaborate.
There is also an online map with lesson plans and primary sources tied to Milwaukee neighborhoods.
“We are heralding the men and women – the legacies of our city’s past – so that our students understand that they are part of a rich tapestry of cultural experiences,” said Robert Smith, director of Marquette’s Center for Urban Research, Teaching & Outreach, which houses MKE Roots.
Milwaukee schools often teach local history through a curriculum that focuses largely on traditional narratives – such as beer barons and European immigrants, Gibson said.
“Students don’t know that Black Milwaukeeans have been here since the 1800s” before Wisconsin was a state, she said. “They don’t know how and why Mexican migrants came to Milwaukee in the 1920s. They don’t know that Wisconsin was one of the first states to pass anti-LGBTQ discrimination laws.”
“No matter where you are as a teacher, you do something like this, and it gives you perspectives that I think truly, as a teacher – especially today – you need,” said Jeffrey Gervais, a fifth-grade teacher at Hamlin Garland School who is participating in this year’s training.
The letter
In 2023, the Department of Education awarded MKE Roots a three-year grant for $1.27 million. However, on June 18, the department sent a letter to Gibson that stated it will not fund the program for the third year.
The letter gave four possible reasons for the decision: The program violates the letter or purpose of federal civil rights law; conflicts with the department’s policy of prioritizing merit, fairness and excellence in education; undermines the well-being of the students the program is intended to help; or constitutes an inappropriate use of federal funds.
It did not specify which reason – or reasons – apply in this case.
The Department of Education did not respond to questions about its decision, but Smith said he can only assume it is because of the Trump administration’s efforts to undermine programs related to diversity, equity and inclusion, often known as DEI.
It calls for eliminating federal funding that supports “gender ideology” or “discriminatory equity ideology” in K-12 curriculum, instruction, programs or activities, as well as teacher education, certification, licensing, employment or training.
DEI or not DEI?
Smith rejects the idea that MKE Roots is a DEI program.
“The notion of DEI is fundamentally based on people having equal access to institutions,” he said. “What we are doing is actually attending to the various populations of students we serve.”
Smith also disputes the reasons listed in the letter from the Department of Education.
“None of the reasons are accurate relative to what we do with MKE Roots,” he said. “This is civics education at its purest – making sure our teachers have the tools to engage in important conversations with their students about Milwaukee, Wisconsin, their neighborhoods and communities, and their role in shaping those neighborhoods and communities.”
Smith and Gibson said they are appealing the decision.
Gibson said she is considering applying for a new Department of Education grant for civic education programs that develop “citizen competency and informed patriotism” especially among low-income students and underserved populations, according to the grant’s description.
It would require redesigning aspects of MKE Roots to put “founding documents in conversation with local context,” Gibson said.
“We would need to find a different funding stream to maintain what MKE Roots currently does,” she added.
Regardless of the outcome, she said, the work will continue.
“I was doing this work before I had funding, and I’ll do it after I have funding.”
Login
