The Trump Administration has taken another significant step toward dismantling the Department of Education by proposing a plan to use six “interagency agreements” that would disperse many of the department’s core functions across several other federal agencies. Although the term may sound benign, this shift would push out seasoned education experts, weaken oversight, and make it harder for students to receive the support they need. Efforts to spread the responsibilities of the Department of Education across several departments put at risk the federal monitoring of states’ K-12 accountability, disproportionately harming underserved student groups. Taking education programs out of the hands of education experts and spreading them across the federal government, risks the effectiveness, safety, and oversight of the education of students across the country. Most importantly, dismantling the Department of Education would eliminate the only cabinet-level position dedicated solely to children and youth, eliminating an important voice for our next generation.
The Trump Administration outlines the creation of new interagency agreements (IAAs) with the Departments of Labor, Interior, Health and Human Services, and State that would transfer major responsibilities out of the Department of Education. Under these, the Department of Labor would assume major responsibility for administering K-12 and postsecondary education programs, a move that suggests the Administration regards K-12 schooling mainly as a vehicle for workforce preparation. However, education plays a much broader role in children’s development: public education helps build democracy, ensure social-emotional development, and equip students with skills to succeed throughout their lives. Moving these programs to the Department of Labor could divert attention from the full range of children’s needs, as the focus of DOL is largely removed from both education policy and child policy.
Not only does the Department of Labor have a distinctly different focus than the Department of Education, the agency also has no experience administering complicated and large education programs. After DOL took over career and technical education, its grant system didn’t recognize the bank accounts of state education agencies, causing funding issues and delays. The Office of Elementary and Secondary Education houses a much larger and more complicated assortment of programs. For example, Title I alone serves 26 million students in nearly 90% of school districts — any delay with these funds would be deeply problematic for students across the country. DOL has shown limited capability for administering education funds at the level the Administration is requiring.
Additionally, although the Administration claims this change would reduce bureaucracy, it would likely do the opposite. Transferring responsibilities and training new staff would require significant administrative time and effort. It would also create confusion and unnecessary work for state and local education agencies. Since the initiative would begin as a partnership between ED and DOL, it would require the time and resources of both departments, ultimately increasing workload and inefficiency.
The Trump Administration has billed its push to dismantle the education department as a way to “move education back to the states where it belongs.” However, states already control curriculum, graduation requirements, teacher certification, and major school funding decisions. The Department of Education exists to make sure every student, regardless of family income, ZIP code, or disability, is able to receive a strong and equitable education. ED plays a critical role in enforcing civil rights, administering federal funding, managing federal student aid, and working to ensure that all students have access to an education that is globally competitive and high-quality. Dismantling the Department of Education risks reversing decades of progress promoting equitable opportunity for all students.