Latest news with #USDOE
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump's dismantling of Education Department gives states 'green light' to pursue voucher programs
A growing number of red states have expanded their school voucher programs in recent years, a trend that is likely to only spike further amid a push led by President Donald Trump's administration to return education 'back to the states.' Conservative education activists have long lauded such programs as a way to give greater control to parents and families. But public education advocates warn that the expansion of these voucher programs presents further risk to the broader school system as it faces peril from Trump's dismantling of the Department of Education. 'Many states came into this administration with a track record of trying to privatize education, and I think they see this move to dismantle and defund the Department of Ed and President Trump's support of school privatization as a green light to be more expansive in their approach moving forward,' said Hilary Wething, an economist at the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute who closely studies the impact of voucher programs on public education. Just last week, Texas enacted a statewide private school voucher program, becoming the 16th state to offer some form of a universal school choice program. In private school voucher programs, families can receive a certain amount of public money to use toward private K-12 school tuition or school supplies. In some states, such programs have previously come with limitations, including narrow eligibility, such as private schools that can accommodate families with children who have special needs or families that are below certain income levels. Proponents of the program in Texas and others like it dub it a 'universal voucher' program because it has no restrictions on who is eligible. Under the program, any family in the state may receive about $10,000 to pay for their children's K-12 private school education. Texas' program will launch in the 2026-27 school year. Statewide voucher programs are far from a new phenomenon. But they have exploded in recent years amid a growing political effort by conservatives at the local, state and federal levels to boost 'school choice' — the notion that parents should have far more options than only their neighborhood public schools. Sixteen states offer at least one voucher program that has universal eligibility, while another 14 offer voucher programs with eligibility requirements, according to the Education Law Center, a public education advocacy group that is critical of voucher programs. At least three states, Texas, Idaho and Tennessee, have enacted their universal programs this year, while in another eight states, attempts by conservative lawmakers to create new voucher programs or expand existing ones stalled or failed, according to the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers union. 'Even though this is not a new explosion of voucher laws, this year continues the explosion of vouchers … and even though the USDOE [dismantling] isn't necessarily the one driving force, it's definitely connected,' said Jessica Levin, the litigation director at the Education Law Center, which is assisting with lawsuits challenging Trump's moves to dismantle the Department of Education. 'The bottom line is that this is a concerted strategy on the part of those who want to defund and dismantle public schools and privatize public education.' The most prominent argument made by critics of voucher programs is that they take public money that would have otherwise been allocated to help fund public schools and deliver it to private schools. Private schools, they note, do not face most of the accountability requirements that public schools do under federal laws. For example, private schools retain the ability to refuse admission to students, are not required to provide individualized education plans to children with learning disabilities and are not required under law to provide disabled students or students facing disciplinary measures certain protections or due process rights. At the same time, funding formulas for public schools are predominantly based on enrollment numbers. So, as students flee public schools — even if in just small numbers — overall funding decreases. 'The students who remain in public schools lose resources,' Levin said, while 'voucher students lose rights.' Meanwhile, Levin explained, voucher-driven pupil departures from public school means 'you're now concentrating higher-need, higher-cost kids in public schools that now have less funding.' Those situations are now compounded by Trump's moves to wind down the Education Department, which experts have said will further upend civil rights enforcement in schools as well as the distribution of billions of dollars to help impoverished and disabled students. U.S. Department of Education spokesperson Savannah Newhouse said in an email to NBC News that 'President Trump and Secretary [Linda] McMahon believe that our nation's students will thrive when parents are given the freedom to choose a school setting that best fits their child's academic needs.' Newhouse added that the administration 'will provide states with best practices on how they can expand educational opportunities and empower local leaders to implement customized policy that will benefit their communities the most.' While some states have had voucher-like programs allowing families to use public money for parochial education dating back more than 100 years, modern voucher programs have been around for about 30 years, having launched in large part in the 1990s amid a grassroots conservative movement to increase options for parents unhappy with their local public schools. But the Covid-19 pandemic emerged as a flashpoint for conservative education activists, who utilized widespread anger among parents unhappy with school closings and remote learning as a launchpad for new and expanded voucher programs across the nation. School voucher proponents say the programs maximize choice for parents, who can use the funds to subsidize the cost of expensive private schools, which, they argue, deliver better outcomes for students. Supporters have also touted the programs as offering a market-based approach that helps promote the best schools and have argued that they have the potential to benefit low-income families or families with uniquely few options for public school. Tommy Schultz, the CEO of the American Federation for Children, a conservative group that advocates for school voucher programs, told Fox News this week that universal voucher programs like the one enacted in Texas give parents 'education freedom.' He praised a similar program that Florida expanded in 2023, claiming it had caused the state's public schools to 'have gotten better.' Schultz denied that Texas' program, or ones like it, would result in fewer resources for public schools, calling that 'the same argument for 30 years' by public education advocates. Andrew Mahaleris, a spokesperson for Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, said in an email that the Republican 'made education freedom a priority because no one knows the needs of their child better than a parent.' 'When it comes to education, parents matter, and families deserve the ability to choose the best education opportunities for their children,' Mahaleris added. 'The Governor signing school choice into law is an unprecedented victory for Texas families, students, and the future of our great state.' But critics point to examples showing that universal school voucher programs are disproportionately used by wealthy families whose children are already enrolled in private schools, or that children in rural areas with few schools have limited options to put the money to use. They also point to studies that refute the claim that private schools deliver better outcomes for students. In addition, enrollment in private schools, even with a voucher to help cover the cost, can still be prohibitively expensive for low-income families, they said. Wething, of the EPI, said analyses have shown that between 60% and 90% of students who take advantage of universal-eligibility voucher programs across the U.S. were already enrolled in private school when they participated in the programs. She warned of the harms she said programs like the one in Texas posed. 'As soon as you get rid of income limits or carveouts for, say, only low-income families or only students with disabilities, you basically open the gates for students who are already attending private school, or who already have enough income to attend private school, to now use state funding to subsidize their private school,' she said. 'It's kind of the next step in what we think of as this voucher evolution.' This article was originally published on
NBC News
10-05-2025
- Business
- NBC News
Trump's dismantling of Education Department gives states 'green light' to pursue voucher programs
A growing number of red states have expanded their school voucher programs in recent years, a trend that is likely to only spike further amid a push led by President Donald Trump's administration to return education 'back to the states.' Conservative education activists have long lauded such programs as a way to give greater control to parents and families. But public education advocates warn that the expansion of these voucher programs presents further risk to the broader school system as it faces peril from Trump's dismantling of the Department of Education. 'Many states came into this administration with a track record of trying to privatize education, and I think they see this move to dismantle and defund the Department of Ed and President Trump's support of school privatization as a green light to be more expansive in their approach moving forward,' said Hilary Wething, an economist at the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute who closely studies the impact of voucher programs on public education. Just last week, Texas enacted a statewide private school voucher program, becoming the 16th state to offer some form of a universal school choice program. In private school voucher programs, families can receive a certain amount of public money to use toward private K-12 school tuition or school supplies. In some states, such programs have previously come with limitations, including narrow eligibility, such as private schools that can accommodate families with children who have special needs or families that are below certain income levels. Proponents of the program in Texas and others like it dub it a 'universal voucher' program because it has no restrictions on who is eligible. Under the program, any family in the state may receive about $10,000 to pay for their children's K-12 private school education. Texas' program will launch in the 2026-27 school year. Statewide voucher programs are far from a new phenomenon. But they have exploded in recent years amid a growing political effort by conservatives at the local, state and federal levels to boost 'school choice' — the notion that parents should have far more options than only their neighborhood public schools. Sixteen states offer at least one voucher program that has universal eligibility, while another 14 offer voucher programs with eligibility requirements, according to the Education Law Center, a public education advocacy group that is critical of voucher programs. At least three states, Texas, Idaho and Tennessee, have enacted their universal programs this year, while in another eight states, attempts by conservative lawmakers to create new voucher programs or expand existing ones stalled or failed, according to the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers union. 'Even though this is not a new explosion of voucher laws, this year continues the explosion of vouchers … and even though the USDOE [dismantling] isn't necessarily the one driving force, it's definitely connected,' said Jessica Levin, the litigation director at the Education Law Center, which is assisting with lawsuits challenging Trump's moves to dismantle the Department of Education. 'The bottom line is that this is a concerted strategy on the part of those who want to defund and dismantle public schools and privatize public education.' The most prominent argument made by critics of voucher programs is that they take public money that would have otherwise been allocated to help fund public schools and deliver it to private schools. Private schools, they note, do not face most of the accountability requirements that public schools do under federal laws. For example, private schools retain the ability to refuse admission to students, are not required to provide individualized education plans to children with learning disabilities and are not required under law to provide disabled students or students facing disciplinary measures certain protections or due process rights. At the same time, funding formulas for public schools are predominantly based on enrollment numbers. So, as students flee public schools — even if in just small numbers — overall funding decreases. 'The students who remain in public schools lose resources,' Levin said, while 'voucher students lose rights.' Meanwhile, Levin explained, voucher-driven pupil departures from public school means 'you're now concentrating higher-need, higher-cost kids in public schools that now have less funding.' Those situations are now compounded by Trump's moves to wind down the Education Department, which experts have said will further upend civil rights enforcement in schools as well as the distribution of billions of dollars to help impoverished and disabled students. U.S. Department of Education spokesperson Savannah Newhouse said in an email to NBC News that 'President Trump and Secretary [Linda] McMahon believe that our nation's students will thrive when parents are given the freedom to choose a school setting that best fits their child's academic needs.' Newhouse added that the administration 'will provide states with best practices on how they can expand educational opportunities and empower local leaders to implement customized policy that will benefit their communities the most.' While some states have had voucher-like programs allowing families to use public money for parochial education dating back more than 100 years, modern voucher programs have been around for about 30 years, having launched in large part in the 1990s amid a grassroots conservative movement to increase options for parents unhappy with their local public schools. But the Covid-19 pandemic emerged as a flashpoint for conservative education activists, who utilized widespread anger among parents unhappy with school closings and remote learning as a launchpad for new and expanded voucher programs across the nation. School voucher proponents say the programs maximize choice for parents, who can use the funds to subsidize the cost of expensive private schools, which, they argue, deliver better outcomes for students. Supporters have also touted the programs as offering a market-based approach that helps promote the best schools and have argued that they have the potential to benefit low-income families or families with uniquely few options for public school. Tommy Schultz, the CEO of the American Federation for Children, a conservative group that advocates for school voucher programs, told Fox News this week that universal voucher programs like the one enacted in Texas give parents 'education freedom.' He praised a similar program that Florida expanded in 2023, claiming it had caused the state's public schools to 'have gotten better.' Schultz denied that Texas' program, or ones like it, would result in fewer resources for public schools, calling that 'the same argument for 30 years' by public education advocates. Andrew Mahaleris, a spokesperson for Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, said in an email that the Republican 'made education freedom a priority because no one knows the needs of their child better than a parent.' 'When it comes to education, parents matter, and families deserve the ability to choose the best education opportunities for their children,' Mahaleris added. 'The Governor signing school choice into law is an unprecedented victory for Texas families, students, and the future of our great state.' But critics point to examples showing that universal school voucher programs are disproportionately used by wealthy families whose children are already enrolled in private schools, or that children in rural areas with few schools have limited options to put the money to use. They also point to studies that refute the claim that private schools deliver better outcomes for students. In addition, enrollment in private schools, even with a voucher to help cover the cost, can still be prohibitively expensive for low-income families, they said. Wething, of the EPI, said analyses have shown that between 60% and 90% of students who take advantage of universal-eligibility voucher programs across the U.S. were already enrolled in private school when they participated in the programs. She warned of the harms she said programs like the one in Texas posed. 'As soon as you get rid of income limits or carveouts for, say, only low-income families or only students with disabilities, you basically open the gates for students who are already attending private school, or who already have enough income to attend private school, to now use state funding to subsidize their private school,' she said. 'It's kind of the next step in what we think of as this voucher evolution.'
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Student mental health services hit by cuts
GUILFORD COUNTY — Guilford County Schools stands to lose $9 million in federal grant funds supporting mental health services for students because the Trump administration says the grants promote diversity, equity and inclusion. The U.S. Department of Education notified recipients of its School-Based Mental Health Services Grant Program in an April 29 letter that it's canceling $1 million in funding at the end of 2025. The School-Based Mental Health Services Grant Program was authorized by Congress in 2022 in response to the mass school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, where a gunman killed 19 elementary school students and two teachers. Surveys of students since the COVID-19 pandemic have found rising levels of depression and loneliness and rising percentages of those who have considered or attempted suicide. GCS was awarded a $14.8 million multiyear grant in January 2023 to deliver direct mental health services to students and to increase the capacity of school counselors, school social workers, school psychologists and licensed mental health clinicians. The grant pays for 75% of the cost of these efforts, with GCS contributing the remaining $3.7 million. Since the grant's inception, GCS has served over 2,000 students in more than 20,000 mental health sessions, supported by nearly 50 clinicians either directly employed or contracted through grant funding, GCS said in a prepared statement Monday. Plans are currently in place to use the remaining grant funds in the 2025-26 school year to expand methods and resources for identifying students in need of mental health support, the statement said. 'Although grant funding is confirmed through December 2025, under USDOE guidelines, GCS will appeal the decision not to extend the grant beyond that point,' the statement said.
Yahoo
16-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Connecticut Department of Education declines to sign Trump administration's DEI compliance orders
CONNECTICUT (WTNH) — In a letter sent to the U.S. Department of Education, the Connecticut State Department of Education (CSDE) declined to sign the Trump administration's DEI compliance request, citing that the state 'already does and will continue to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.' Gov. Ned Lamont (D-Conn.) and Education Commissioner Charlene Russell-Tucker made the announcement Wednesday. The letter to the United States Department of Education (USDOE) reads in part, 'Connecticut remains committed to safeguarding Connecticut students against the insidious effects of discrimination and continues to align its principles and programs with the requirements and purpose of Title VI, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin.' 'CSDE regularly reaffirms its compliance with all federal program assurances, through which USDOE continues to provide federal funding,' the letter read. Read the full letter below. CT-Department-of-Education-letterDownload 'In Connecticut, we're proud to support the incredible diversity of our schools and work tirelessly to ensure that every child, regardless of background, has access to a quality education and the best opportunity at the starting line in life,' Lamont said in a written statement. 'From our educators, who are mentoring and inspiring the next generation of young people, to our curriculum, our commitment to education is what has made our schools nationally recognized, and we plan to continue doing what makes our students, teachers, and schools successful.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
08-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Schools get unclear DEI directive from fed
On Thursday, the U.S. Department of Education sent a letter to state education departments requesting every school district in the country sign a certification that they are not using diversity, equity and inclusion programs that are deemed discriminatory by the federal government, or they could face the federal government cutting their funds. USDOE asked state education departments to sign a 'reminder of legal obligations' within 10 days to confirm that they are not giving unfair advantages to people based on race, and to gather signatures from school districts. The particular funds at state are Title I grants — which are grants for low-income students. Local school superintendents said the U.S. Education Department's letter is unclear, vague and leaves the scope and specifics of 'impermissible' DEI programs undefined. New York's Education Department has responded with a letter to USDOE, saying the federal government's request is redundant and lacking authority. The legal ground cited for the USDOE order is Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, as well as a 2023 Supreme Court ruling involving Harvard University which overturned affirmative action admissions practices in colleges. DEI OBJECTIONS Trump's administration considers certain DEI practices to violate the Civil Rights Act. 'Many schools have advanced discriminatory policies and practices under the banner of 'DEI' initiatives,' USDOE alleges, saying white and Asian American students are sometimes discriminated against in education. NYSED said USDOE does not have the legal authority to make such a demand, that its basis for this directive was 'conflating policy with law' and that New York school districts already follow the Civil Rights Act. 'Given the fact that you are already in possession of guarantees by NYSED that it has and will comply with Title VI, no further certification will be forthcoming,' NYSED Deputy Commissioner Daniel Morton-Bentley wrote. 'We understand that the current administration seeks to censor anything it deems '(DEI.)' But there are no federal or state laws prohibiting the principles of DEI.' On Friday, Lake Placid Central School District Superintendent Tim Seymour said his district's legal counsel received a message from the state saying the districts will not be required to respond individually to the federal government's demands, but that it would be a question to be resolved between the state and the federal government. The districts have not received the letter themselves. The letters went to state education chiefs, who are asked to then collect the signatures from every school district. Ultimately, if districts were to respond, it would be up to the boards of education whether to sign it or not. The state is advising against signing it, saying the federal government has yet to define what practices would be considered violations, and that the directive is based on USDOE's interpretation of the law, which is not the same as a law. 'NYSED is unaware of any authority that USDOE has to demand that a state education agency agree to its interpretation of a judicial decision or change the terms and conditions of NYSED's award without formal administrative process,' Morton-Bentley wrote. Saranac Lake Central School District Superintendent Diane Fox was not surprised by this announcement. She's been prepared for it. When she presented the tentative school budget last month, she noted the district was preparing for this exact situation. While Trump's administration is working to dismantle the DOE and federal officials say the department's grant funds will still be available, Fox had anticipated that they may be smaller or come with 'strings attached.' These are the strings. SLCSD's tentative budget already shifted the positions funded by these federal grants into the general budget in anticipation of something going awry, absorbing around $400,000 to keep special education, counseling and academic intervention staff next year without having to rely on these grants to fund those positions. Fox said, as the budget approaches a vote on Wednesday, things are 'murky as best' again with the new directive. 'The federal requirement is not exact in what they are looking for when they talk about DEI programs,' Fox said. 'They have not clearly spelled out what is on the OK list and what is not on the OK list.' Define DEI What counts as DEI? It's unclear. With the scope of potential 'impermissible' DEI practices unknown, school leaders don't want to agree to something without knowing what it is. 'I don't have an opinion when you ask whether or not I'll sign the letter because I haven't really seen what the letter is asking me to sign,' Fox said. The directive's cited DEI targets are mostly things don't seem to apply to public K-12 schools — scholarships, financial aid, administrative support, housing and graduation ceremonies. It was unclear as of press time Friday night whether this directive applies to North Country Community College, a New York state college in Saranac Lake. One big question is if this applies to curriculum. Education Secretary Linda McMahon previously said in her Senate confirmation hearing that she wasn't sure if a Black history class might violate the DEI policy and that she'd have to 'fully understand the breadth of the executive order' to answer that. Later, the department said not all race-focused classes would violate their new guidelines, but some would. The department also said things like Black History Month celebrations or programs focused on specific cultures would be OK, 'so long as they do not engage in racial exclusion or discrimination.' 'Federal financial assistance is a privilege, not a right,' USDOE acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor said in a statement. 'When state education commissioners accept federal funds, they agree to abide by federal antidiscrimination requirements. Unfortunately, we have seen too many schools flout or outright violate these obligations, including by using DEI programs to discriminate against one group of Americans to favor another based on identity characteristics.' Roger Catania, the region's local Board of Regents representative, said the SCOTUS case cited in the order was about college admissions and the USDOE was trying to use it expansively to say that any representation of student background is discriminatory. He said this is 'misinterpreting' the decision and then going way beyond it. 'What the state Education Department said adheres to the law, and what the federal government said does not. That's the bottom line,' Catania said. 'They're making use of the culture war language to try to put public school districts on their heels.' There's several situations that could happen here. The state could ask districts not to sign it, the boards could not agree to sign it, the boards could sign it and then be found in violation of it. Fox said the district has state DEI requirements it must meet. 'WE DON'T LIKE UNCERTAINTY' Catania said this puts districts in a bind between the law and the federal government asking them to go beyond the law by threatening funding, and that district officials feel nervous, especially since they are all currently crafting their budgets. 'I've made school budgets before,' Catania, the former LPCSD superintendent, said. 'We don't like uncertainty.' He said the Title I federal funding is established by law and approved by Congress. If districts do lose funding, he's sure it would be challenged in court and he believes the districts would win, but no one wants to have to go through that. Morton-Bentley said this directive marks 'an abrupt shift from USDOE's position on DEI during the first Trump administration,' when then-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos said diversity and inclusion are 'cornerstones' and 'key elements for success.' The Education Department last month introduced an 'End DEI' portal where people can report discriminatory practices based on race or sex at public schools to get the department to investigate and potentially cut funding. Seymour stands by his district's current policies, saying they have always abided by Title VI. 'We have and continue to be nondiscriminatory in our policies and practices,' he said. 'Our focus remains on providing the very best education for our students.' LPCSD receives about $150,000 per year for Title I funding. It goes towards things like reading support and materials that help support low-income students. The district has a budget of about $23.1 million, the vast majority of which is funded by the local tax levy, so the district would be in a position to recoup any theoretical losses from federal funding, Seymour said. Fox said none of the DEI work at SLCSD meets the label of being 'discriminatory.' 'Absolutely not,' she said. At SLCSD, she said DEI means everybody feels like they belong and are put on equal footing. She said it's not about putting one group over another, but inviting everyone in. When it comes to hiring practices, and Fox said SLCSD has a 'big table' for anyone to sit at. When it comes to curriculum, Fox said she is holding the line and told teachers to keep teaching what they are free to do. SLCSD, like many districts in New York, has a DEI committee. SLCSD's committee was actually created before the state recommended every district have one, after its 2020 valedictorian Francine 'Frannie' Newman used her valedictory address to talk about racism she endured during school as an Asian student. The committee has met monthly since then. Fox said when they started, nobody was doing anything specifically DEI-related. In the years since, they've hired staff, drafted policies and increased DEI work to make sure all students fell welcome and accepted at school.
