What if the Department of Education is Dismantled?

We hosted a discussion with education experts and practitioners on February 12–view the full recording here. On March 20, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education. Below is a recap of our discussion. 

The new U.S. administration has sent shockwaves across the education community. Plans to fundamentally reshape access to public education and protect student rights have provoked fear and confusion among educators, school leaders, families, and others invested in preK through post-secondary public schools. One big question our Education team has been grappling with is: ‍

What if the Department of Education (ED) is dismantled? 

Many have written about the issue–some pieces brimming with sensationalism, others offering more thoughtful analysis. We wondered whether open dialogue might both deepen our understanding of the issues and inspire action. With that in mind, we brought together a diverse group of experts for a candid conversation, inviting our broader community to listen and engage. 

To understand where we are today, our team offered a brief history of the Department of Education. In 1979, ED was established by Congress with a bold mission to: 

• Distribute federal funding to states and districts equitably. 
• Enforce civil rights laws and protect students from discrimination.
• Ensure that federal funds supplement state and local education spending. 
• Collect and analyze educational data to guide policy decisions. 

ED wields broad influence across the country, supporting students by: 

• Ensuring access and quality in publicly-funded preschools. 
• Overseeing federal student aid programs.
• Guaranteeing accreditation, consumer protection, and civil rights compliance. 
• Providing oversight of student loans, institutional accountability, and protections against predatory colleges. 

To get a sense of what was discussed during the panel, below is a summary of the questions posed and a consolidated overview of the responses from the insights that multiple panelists shared.

The Department’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR) was founded in order to ensure equal access to education and to promote educational excellence through enforcement of civil rights. When you think about the changes that have already been rolled out, as well as future changes, what rights do you think are at stake? 

All critical civil rights protections are at stake. Civil rights data collection is a huge part of OCR’s purpose, so if that is gutted, we’ll lose access to critical data that helps to shine a light on systemic inequalities. The data from OCR is critical to help us understand the opportunity gap beneath the achievement gap. Another concern is bullying and the lack of data that helps us enforce anti-bullying policies. From elementary through post-secondary institutions, it inhibits their ability to support student well-being. 

States have data reporting expectations to the Department of Education which provide the public with insights on affordability and investment at the post-secondary level, and to measure student progress and school success in K-12. Without guidance from ED on what data to collect and share, what changes might we see for students and families? 

Without comparative reporting, it’s difficult to know what’s going on in a school system. ED uses data to illuminate opportunity gaps and report those gaps, as well as to help the public understand if and how states are implementing the law as written by Congress. 

Without robust data reporting, we can’t see who is–and isn’t–getting access to crucial resources, making it more likely that existing inequalities will remain hidden and continue to grow. In Washington State, for example, school-level reporting requirements allowed the Department to identify that lower-income students were receiving 16% less funding, which perpetuates inequality for those students. 

Federal funding plays a crucial role in expanding access to higher education, particularly for low-income and underrepresented students. What are some of the potential ramifications of dismantling the ED on funding? What might happen if we see a reduction in funding in post-secondary education? 

Funding higher education is often seen as a ladder to opportunity and without federal support, too many students will find that ladder broken. A core piece of this is the Pell Grant program, whose recipients are often first-generation students, from rural communities, students of color, adult learners, the list goes on. Dismantling ED could limit funding and complicate the administration of funds, creating barriers where there should be access. 

Panelist also received thoughtful questions from the audience, including: 

• As control of education funds would head to states, how can we serve our most marginalized students? Is there any sense of which states might collaborate? 
• When you think about the conversation we’re having together and the climate we’re in, what is one concrete action everyday community members can take? 
• Important educational data is beginning to disappear and we’ll likely see more of it. How do you suggest we tackle this issue? (Tia Holiday and Alison Gazarek wrote an insight about this issue in response to this question.)

Hear panelist’s responses in the recording here. 

While our team cannot anticipate all the ways that the department of education might transform under this administration, we are committed to continuing this conversation and advocating for equitable systems. 

Interested to hear about more iF’s Education work or attend a future panel? Reach out to Beth Freitas Clark at bethfc@intentionalfutures.com.