Clarification: This story has been updated to clarify the U.S. Department of Education’s response.
Despite ongoing efforts to transition federal education programs to other agencies, billions of federal dollars for K-12 schools will continue to flow through the U.S. Department of Education’s grant portal this summer, the nation’s top K-12 official told states last week.
Programs like Title I aid for disadvantaged students and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act for special education allocate funds for school districts, but by law the money flows first to states in two batches: one on July 1 and another three months later.
Kirsten Baesler, the assistant secretary of elementary and secondary education, told state education chiefs on April 17 that the department is responding to “concerns regarding the July 1 formula grant timeline” for this year by sending those funds through the traditional channel, rather than moving the funds through the U.S. Department of Labor, where most federal K-12 programs are shifting.
“This will give states, ED, and DOL more time to collaborate on procedures, processes, and training to ensure states are set up to successfully receive and draw down formula funds from DOL,” Baesler wrote in an email obtained by Education Week.
State leaders were concerned about struggling to access funds on time, which could force schools to abruptly shutter summer programming or even delay the start of school in some places, said Julia Martin, director of policy and government affairs for the Bruman Group, a law firm that represents state education agencies and schools.
“This announcement brings down the temperature somewhat,” Martin said.
It leaves some questions unanswered, though. Baesler’s email doesn’t say whether the agency plans to use Education Department systems for the Oct. 1 batch of funds—or for the K-12 formula dollars for Native American students that are slated to move to the Interior Department.
In a statement, an Education Department spokesperson said the agency is “committed to delivering formula funding by the July 1 deadline.”
“We acknowledge concerns from state chiefs following last year’s funding delay,” wrote Savannah Newhouse, the agency’s press secretary.
Last year’s delay, however, was not related to the question of which grant portal would carry the funds. That unprecedented situation—in which the administration held back nearly $7 billion in congressionally approved funds for weeks from programs including Title II for professional development, Title III for English-learner services, and Title IV for academic enrichment programming—prompted legal challenges and bipartisan backlash. Congress in response included a provision in the budget it passed in February specifying that the education funds must go out by July 1.
Russell Vought, who leads the federal Office of Management and Budget, last week dismissed suggestions from lawmakers that the Trump administration has illegally tampered with congressional appropriations.
The Trump administration is conducting “programmatic reviews” to assess federal expenditures for “waste, fraud, and abuse,” he said. Those reviews don’t require congressional approval, he added—though legal experts disagree.
Moving programs out of the Education Department won’t happen overnight
The decision to keep using the Education Department’s grant portal reflects the uphill battle Department of Education officials under President Donald Trump face as they push to hasten the agency’s demise.
The Education Department last November signed an agreement to transfer day-to-day responsibilities for most K-12 formula funds to the Labor Department. At the time, Education Secretary Linda McMahon said the Labor Department “has a much more sophisticated system” for filling grants than the Education Department.
McMahon also has framed the agreement—and nine others the agency has signed—as a temporary measure to show skeptical lawmakers the value of closing the Education Department altogether, a point that Vought reiterated to lawmakers last week.
The Department of Labor’s Employment and Training Administration in recent months has advertised new education grant competitions “on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education,” and the two agencies have touted their collaboration in jointly running the competitions.
Still, most staffers overseeing those programs still work for the Department of Education. The postings announcing grant availability list Education Department email addresses under the section with contact information.
The Labor Department historically has not managed a high volume of formula grants with complex rules like the education programs have; its normal responsibilities include disbursing unemployment benefits and enforcing labor laws. More recently, the agency has taken charge of the Education Department funds that support career-technical education and adult learning—with varying levels of success.
Some states received their Oct. 1 set of funds for these programs on time last fall, while others struggled for weeks or even months to access their allocations.
Some state education agencies that manage CTE funds are already set up in the Labor system, and might not have struggled much if the K-12 dollars came through the same system.
But in states including Colorado, Idaho, Minnesota, Montana, and Wisconsin, the agency that handles Perkins funding for CTE programs isn’t the same one that oversees funding for K-12 schools. Education agencies in those states likely would have to start from scratch with the Labor system.
The Labor Department has also been under scrutiny during Trump’s second administration because of allegations that Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer drank on the job and engaged in inappropriate relationships with subordinates. Separately, her husband was barred from the Labor Department headquarters amid allegations of sexual assault.
Chavez-DeRemer resigned on April 20. Keith Sonderling, her second-in-command, took over as acting secretary.
All of this has made states and schools wary of counting on federal funds to flow as expected.
Trump administration officials “have said publicly that they want to reduce reliance on the federal government as a source of funds,” Martin said. “To the extent that [school districts] are delaying spending or planning around those appropriations, they have somewhat succeeded.”
