WASHINGTON (AP) —  on Monday signed an executive order calling for revamped  that promote his long-held but discredited theory that childhood shots should be spaced out into separate medical visits.

The order advocates separating the  into three different single-disease shots and administering all childhood immunizations at separate appointments whenever possible. It also directs the nation’s health department to improve research on vaccines, which are already , and present a plan to offer separate measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines for children, since that is not currently an option in the United States.

The renewed focus on vaccines marks a departure from the Trump administration’s recent efforts to emphasize  related to healthy eating, drug price negotiations and medical fraud crackdowns ahead of November’s midterm elections.

Public health experts have raised concerns that spacing out shots as Trump suggests can lead to an increased risk that children become infected with a vaccine-preventable disease before returning for another visit. Childhood vaccines — and how and when to give them in combination — go through rigorous studies, and safety tracking continues for years as the shots are used.

Trump called the announcement a “major victory for parents rights, religious and constitutional rights, and for the gold standard science.”

Speaking about the order at the Oval Office on Monday, Trump repeatedly suggested the number or timing of vaccines could play a role in rising rates of autism spectrum disorder, even as scientific consensus and decades of studies have firmly concluded . The order also includes several changes to the childhood vaccine schedule that his health department has already attempted, but that have been blocked by a federal judge. A White House official who insisted on anonymity to brief reporters said Trump was within his right to provide his own recommendation through the executive order and said the lawsuit blocking the health department’s schedule was a separate issue.

Dr. Andrew Racine, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, said the announcement spreads uncertainty, fear and confusion where “there doesn’t need to be any of that.” He disputed Trump’s recommendations and said previous ones should stand.

“Science about vaccines and their efficacy has not changed,” he said. “The distribution of viruses and other pathogens in our environment has not changed. Children in this country have not changed in the last 48 hours.”

Sen. Bill Cassidy, the Republican chair of the Senate health committee, slammed the executive order in a social media post, saying vaccines are safe and do not cause autism.

“I’m a doctor. This executive order is wrong,” the Louisiana senator wrote. “The President does not have the expertise to make these changes.”

Who is in charge of vaccine policy?

Even as the order calls for revised vaccine recommendations, states, not the federal government, have the authority to require vaccinations for schoolchildren. The order advises states with school vaccine mandates to consider updating their laws to reflect the administration’s preferred schedule, according to a White House fact sheet.

Last December, Trump ordered the Department of Health and Human Services to review how peer nations approach vaccine recommendations and consider revising U.S. guidance accordingly. The department responded by cutting the number of  it recommends for every child, a move that has since been blocked in court.

Changes to federal childhood vaccine recommendations customarily require approval from the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The newly Senate-confirmed CDC director, Dr. Erica Schwartz, oversaw policies promoting vaccination of service members while in a leadership position at the U.S. Coast Guard.

However, public health law expert Lawrence Gostin at Georgetown University said the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Trump’s power may allow him to supersede Schwartz if she does not agree to new recommendations.

“This is clearly the first test for Dr. Erica Schwartz,” Gostin said in an email. “The President is placing her in an untenable position.”

Asked on a call with reporters why the president was advocating splitting MMR into three single-disease vaccines, the White House official did not provide any studies supporting the decision. They said that was Trump’s long-held view and that some countries provide individual measles vaccines in certain circumstances.

Kush Desai, a Trump spokesperson, told The Associated Press that the president is “one of countless parents who have voiced questions and concerns about the combined MMR vaccine” and said the plan to develop single-disease vaccines would “give parents more options on timing and frequency for their children,” ultimately increasing vaccine uptake.

Studies of babies and toddlers in the U.S. have shown that the use of combination shots for childhood vaccines, rather than single ones, increased the likelihood of completing all recommended vaccinations by the age of 2.

Announcement follows other Trump administration vaccine actions

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an anti-vaccine activist before he entered politics, set out to overhaul immunization guidance at HHS in the first year of Trump’s term. He fired an entire 17-member , installing replacements who made  that have since been halted by a federal judge. He also personally directed the CDC to abandon its position that vaccines do not cause autism, without supplying any new evidence to support the change.

Throughout his second term, Trump has been fixated on connecting autism to vaccines. He has recently ramped up pressure on Kennedy to identify the cause of autism, something Kennedy had pledged to do with new research unveiled last year. Trump publicly prodded the health secretary for an update on autism research in a Cabinet meeting last month.

“How are you doing on the autism research?” Trump asked.

“We will have an answer for you,” Kennedy said.

Scientific consensus and decades of studies have firmly concluded there is no link between childhood vaccines and autism. Racine reiterated that point on Monday, noting that the potential link had been studied in “over 40 methodologically well-designed studies in over seven countries involving over 5 million children.”

“I’m not sure that there is anything that has been as thoroughly looked at as this question,” he said. “And the answer is unequivocally no.”

In the Oval Office, Kennedy repeated his assertion that he believes an unknown environmental factor is to blame for rising autism diagnoses and said that his department will deliver research findings “as soon as they are ready.”

Monday’s order comes as students are returning to classrooms around the country and the nation contends with a measles outbreak that experts say could result in the U.S. losing its .

Doctors have raised concerns that Trump’s falsehoods on vaccines could stoke vaccine hesitancy. Federal data shows U.S.  have been dropping, with the share of children with exemptions rising to an all-time high in the 2024-25 school year.

Associated Press writers Laura Ungar and Mike Stobbe contributed to this report. Swenson reported from New York.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s administration is planning a dramatic overhaul of  that would gut its quality standards, upending the hallmarks of the early education program for impoverished children, two people familiar with the deliberations said.

Head Start, established in the 1960s to help fight poverty, has long been considered by experts to be a gold standard early learning program. Its regulations, which stretch more than 100 pages, outline requirements on everything from child-to-teacher ratios and child health screenings to family engagement.

Trump’s Republican administration would replace those regulations with around a dozen pages of rules, leaving most of the specifics up to state and local law, said the people familiar with the deliberations, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss information that was not yet public and because they feared reprisal.

In a post on X on Saturday night, the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees Head Start, said to expect a rule to be published this week. The administration “remains committed to strengthening Head Start by preserving federal investment in the program while advancing reforms that expand access, increase local flexibility, reduce unnecessary administrative burden, and ensure services are delivered effectively to children and families in need,” department spokesperson Emily Hilliard said Monday in an email.

The draft rules would require more documentation from parents who are homeless or unemployed, the people familiar with the deliberations told The Associated Press. An early version of the proposal also would have barred parents who are in the United States illegally from enrolling their children, even if the children are U.S. citizens. It’s unclear whether those provisions will make the final draft.

Head Start, which operates in all 50 states, has long enjoyed robust bipartisan support. But some prominent conservatives in recent years have called for , saying the federal government should get out of the education business at every level. Deregulating the program would deliver a win for them and aligns with the Trump administration’s goals of scrapping rules it views as onerous or unnecessary.

Head Start is designed to target poverty, experts say

Head Start serves more than half a million low-income babies, toddlers and preschoolers nationwide. For families that qualify, it offers free preschool and screenings to identify developmental delays. It also offers supports for families.

If the changes take effect, they could make Head Start unrecognizable, said Khari Garvin, who ran the Office of Head Start under President Joe Biden, a Democrat.

“We’d have the carcass of Head Start,” Garvin said. “You might have a program that’s called Head Start, but in substance it will not be.”

The proposed rules were originally reported in The Bulwark.

Tommy Sheridan, deputy director of the National Head Start Association, said the organization has yet to see the proposed rules. But he said the potential for a massive overhaul has left the organization on edge.

“We’re very anxious,” Sheridan said. “When it does come out … we’ll be ready to fight back where we need to fight back.”

Still, he emphasized that Head Start centers might not be impacted for months, if the rules get on the books at all. Once the proposal is made public, federal law requires the administration to give at least a month for the public to weigh in on it. Then, once finalized, it may take more time for the rules to take effect. There’s also the potential for a lawsuit to halt implementation.

Current rules cover dental screenings and staff-to-student ratios

Head Start was created as part of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty and targets the myriad challenges that low-income households face. It serves children and adults alike, coaching parents on reaching their goals, connecting them with services and even employing them.

Head Start operators, which include school districts and nonprofit organizations, are required to provide medical, dental and vision screenings for children and to monitor them for developmental delays. There’s also a curriculum framework and prohibitions on physical and emotional abuse of children.

Many of the features that make Head Start distinct from mainstream preschools are spelled out in 122 pages of performance standards. The Trump administration’s proposal would toss most of that rule book and replace it with a much shorter version that eliminates or loosens many requirements, the people familiar with the proposal said. But the proposal also calls for some new regulations, such as requiring all instruction in English.

Requirements around staff-to-student ratios and safety standards would be erased. Operators instead would be instructed to follow local and state laws, which are often far more permissive. And the new proposal also says nothing about suspensions and expulsions, the people said, making it easier for programs to  who are difficult to educate.

Head Start is under threat

Head Start, which has enjoyed robust bipartisan support for decades, has faced several threats since Trump . Project 2025,  authored by the official who is now Trump’s budget chief, called for the federal government to get rid of the program altogether. Last year, in a draft budget, the administration proposed exactly that, saying: “The federal government should not be in the business of mandating curriculum, locations, and performance standards for any form of education.” After public outcry, Health Secretary , whose department oversees Head Start, told Congress the program’s funding was safe.

Funding for the program was disrupted not long after Trump took office, leading some programs to have to shutter temporarily. It was once again halted after  in October that led some centers briefly to close their doors.

Earlier this year, Trump officials also erased a Biden-era rule that mandated raises and greater benefits for Head Start employees. When the rule went in to effect in 2024, , the majority of whom have bachelor’s degrees, earned less than $40,000 a year on average.

The story was originally published by The Associated Press. Ali Swenson contributed reporting.

But unlike other states with millions of eligible students, like Texas, Florida and New York, California hasn’t opted into the new Treasury Department program, and so far, there’s no sign it will. 

That’s one takeaway from by advocates showing the number of students in each state who would qualify for the funding under the Education Freedom Tax Credit. Overall, 51.7 million children in public, private and charter schools could potentially receive a taxpayer-funded scholarship, according to the analysis from the American Federation for Children, the leading advocacy group behind the legislation. Past estimates have shown how much scholarship granting organizations, or SGOs, might each year and what the tax credit might cost the federal government in . But author Patrick Graff, a senior fellow at the organization, said it was important to look at the program from another angle. 

“Who are the kids that would actually benefit from these programs, and who are the families that would receive services that they otherwise wouldn’t receive?” he asked. Founded by former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, the federation has historically championed private school choice. 

But with public school students able to receive funds for tutoring and other supplemental programs, Graff expects district superintendents “especially in states where there are going to be budget crunches to strongly call on leaders” to participate, if not next year, then in 2028.

To calculate the number of eligible students, Graff used Census Bureau estimates and survey data. K-12 students qualify if their household income doesn’t exceed 300% of the area median income. In Montgomery County, Maryland, for example, that’s almost $500,000. In Perry County, Alabama, one of the poorest counties in the nation, the family income limit would be $125,500. 

The report also notes that close to 800,000 homeschooled students would be left out of the program even though they meet family income requirements. Under current guidance, those children would only be eligible if their states classify homeschoolers as private school students. Unless the Treasury Department provides further clarification on the issue, that means some homeschoolers who use microschools would also be excluded. 

‘Complete mystery’

So far, 31 states have opted in by submitting paperwork with the IRS or indicating that they will. New York and Colorado are the only two Democratic-led states that plan to participate.

In California, school choice advocates are frustrated. 

“It’s a complete mystery why Gov. Gavin Newsom hasn’t made the easiest no-brainer decision and opted into the program already,” said Lance Christensen, vice president of the conservative California Policy Center and a former Republican candidate for state superintendent.

But the governor, who President Donald Trump and criticizes his policies, has been silent on the issue. A spokeswoman for the governor declined to comment about the program. 

Congressman Kevin Kiley, an independent from the Sacramento area, Newsom to opt in before he leaves office in January. A state legislator, Republican Assemblyman Josh Hoover has also introduced encouraging the governor to participate. 

Democrat Xavier Becerra, the former Health and Human Services secretary in the Biden administration, is leading in to succeed Newsom, but his focuses on early-childhood education and lowering class sizes. Steve Hilton, the Republican candidate, and would be more likely to opt into the tax credit.

‘Benefits for public schools’

Starting next year, the program, also known as the Federal Scholarship Tax Credit, allows taxpayers who donate up to $1,700 annually to a nonprofit SGO to deduct that same amount from what they owe in taxes. States will have to submit a list of approved SGOs, and according to , won’t be able to set additional requirements on those organizations, like only approving nonprofits that intend to serve students in public or private schools.

To help prepare district leaders, AASA, the School Superintendents Association, and Education Resource Strategies launched a last week. Josh Cowen, a Michigan State University professor and outspoken critic of publicly funded vouchers, said the guidance will help districts and nonprofits that intend to serve public school students catch up with what has traditionally been a private sector model.

“There’s nothing like this with respect to the benefits for public schools,” said Cowen, who doesn’t want districts to miss out on new funding. His views on the program changed when the final version of the law, part of Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill, made participation optional and limited what donors could contribute. “I think public school students are going to be by far the biggest beneficiaries.” 

By early next year, he expects the number of states opting in to reach 40, but he doesn’t think the American Federation for Children’s analysis will prompt any action from undecided governors. 

In fact, he thinks Democrats are turned off by Tommy Schultz, CEO of the federation, for opting in over from the teachers unions and Education Secretary Linda McMahon promoting the program. In June, she participated in aimed at getting Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro to sign up.

On one hand, governors “understand there’s substantial revenue for public schools involved in this,” Cowen said. But the same Trump administration, he added, in Minnesota earlier this year and is from California and Minnesota as it conducts a review. “It’s really hard for them to look at the program and say ‘Well, this is a good faith effort.’ ”

In court documents, the administration has also clean energy grants to states that didn’t vote for Trump in 2024. Those larger political issues are getting in the way, Cowen said. Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek, a Democrat, said she won’t opt into the tax credit program because she the administration, and recently called it a “tax scheme” that would benefit private schools.

Critics, like the left-leaning Century Foundation, argue that the new source of funds will support private and religious schools that LGBTQ students and those with disabilities. As the number of private schools increases in anticipation of the new program, students will likely be able to use the scholarships at schools that receive . 

In a , Jack Schneider, director of the Center for Education Policy at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and journalist Jennifer Berkshire called the program “a Trojan horse designed to bring the chaos of privatization into Democratic strongholds like Massachusetts,” and warned Gov. Maura Healey against it.

Taking the opposite view, Charles Barone, senior director of the National Parents Union’s Center for Innovation, New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill to opt in, calling the policy “a potential tool for expanding opportunity within the public system.”

Because taxpayers can donate to SGOs in any state, Graff, with the American Federation for Children, predicts that it will be especially hard for states in the northeast to resist.

“They’re pretty quickly being surrounded by states that are signaling their intent to opt in,” he said. In addition to New York, New Hampshire will participate. “That’s giving a few of those other governors a little more permission to step out on this issue.” 

For decades, he said, Washington politicians gave young people “nothing but debt,” he said.

“The government is finally giving money back to our children,” he told the crowd at Wheeler High School in Cobb County, inviting families who have opened accounts to join him on stage with their children.

The event brought together several cabinet members who joined the president in urging families to open Trump Accounts. Before Trump took the stage in the school’s large gymnasium, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Treasurer Brandon Beach, Education Secretary Linda McMahon and Kelly Loeffler, a former Georgia senator who now serves as head of the Small Business Administration, all described the child savings policy as transformational.

McMahon called it “one of the largest generational investments in upward mobility that our country has ever made.”

Under the savings initiative, which went live July 4, the administration will give $1,000 deposits to children born during the president’s term if their parents open a Trump Account. Over seven million children are already enrolled in the program, Bessent told the crowd.��

The child savings account program was included in last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Parents and others can contribute to the tax-deferred account until the child turns 18 and converts it into a traditional individual retirement account. 

Philanthropists Michael and Susan Dell expanded on the government’s contribution last year when they to provide an extra $250 for 25 million children 10 and under living in ZIP codes with median incomes below $150,000. Other donors have since made contributions, some for specific states. 

Chris Woods, a financial adviser and Cobb district parent, told 91ɬ�� that he thinks the policy is a wise move.

“There are a lot of ways to save for children’s college and their future,” he said. “The difference is you’re getting funds from the government.”

But Eli Speer, a recent high school graduate and Trump supporter, said the program isn’t “fiscally conservative.”

“We have to prioritize shaving down the debt, cutting red tape,” he said.

The agreed, calling Trump Accounts a “government welfare program” that further complicates the tax system and might not be a better investment opportunity than existing options. Others question whether the families who would benefit the most from the program are even aware of it. An showed that higher-earning adults and those who already have at least $5,000 in savings were more likely to know about the program.

Bessent, however, pushed back on criticisms that the policy will favor wealthier families. Of the families who have already opened accounts for their kids, he said 86% earn household incomes of $200,000 or less.

“Trump Accounts are reaching the very people they were designed to serve,” he said. “President Trump is creating assets for the American people, not more debt and broken promises.”

Despite the strong turnout Wednesday, Cobb County is not actually “Trump country,” as several speakers called it. Trump lost Cobb all three times he ran for president. The district, however, is led by a majority Republican board. 

“The school board is the last bastion of Republican control that Cobb County has,” said Heather Tolley-Bauer, a co-founder of Watching the Funds-Cobb, a watchdog group that this week about whether district resources were being used to support what was in part a political rally. District staff handled several logistics for the event, organizing refreshments and helping with security.

“It clearly wasn’t to advocate for public education, our students or to share all that’s great about our schools,” she said. “It was to serve the Republican Party.”

Several students also gathered in a Kroger parking lot a few miles away to protest the president coming to one of their high schools.

Some of Trump’s policies haven’t been popular at the school, where the majority of students are Black and Hispanic. In late January, Wheeler students were among the hundreds across Cobb County schools who walked out to protest immigration enforcement activities nationwide.

“I don’t love the fact that we are using a public school to promote a partisan political agenda,” said Edward Kim, a Wheeler graduate.

Multiple candidates running for statewide office had a chance to make campaign pitches Wednesday.

State Sen. Brian Strickland, candidate for attorney general, said families are relocating to Georgia to leave blue states that supported former President Biden’s agenda.

“In November, we have a big decision to make,” he said. “We have to get this right.” 

Trump also told the attendees to vote for Rep. Mike Collins, who didn’t attend because of votes in Congress. Collins will face Democratic Sen. John Ossoff in November. Ossoff, he said, will “bankrupt your families.”

Rick Jackson, GOP candidate for governor also greeted the crowd and joined Trump on the platform. While he touted his expertise as a businessman as the solution to Democrats’ “affordability crisis,” he also spoke at length about Trump Accounts.

As someone who grew up in foster care, he applauded first lady Melania Trump’s initiative, in which states can open accounts for children in foster care.

“This is more than just an account. It’s a message,” he said about Trump Accounts. “You are seen, and you are valued.” 

Many attendees said they just wanted a chance to see a sitting president in person. Melissa Moeller, who has two children in Cobb schools, learned about it because her 10^th grader’s marching band practice was relocated from Wheeler because of the event. 

It didn’t bother her, however, that the school’s landscaping was spruced up for the official visit.

“They’re doing that anyway. With the president coming anywhere, I’m ok with a little pomp and circumstance,” she said. “Will it ever happen again? I don’t know.”

U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement has detained more than 650 children in California under President Donald Trump’s second term, an EdSource analysis of federal data has found. Most arrests happened in California communities, rather than at the border, and involved minors who resided and attended school in the state.

The number of children detained in the state’s interior rose 90% during the first year of Trump’s second term compared to the prior year under the Biden administration, our analysis shows. More than 100 of the children detained under Trump were age 5 or under. 

The rise in child detainments in the state’s interior began soon after Trump took office in January 2025. Trump won office on a promise to carry out mass deportations, “illegal immigrant killers, rapists, and drug dealers from our streets and sending them back where they belong.”

Starting immediately and escalating over the summer of 2025, ICE agents have conducted large-scale operations in neighborhoods with large immigrant populations. Some children have been detained while accompanying parents to routine ICE check-ins. The practices reflect an escalation in enforcement activity that .

The children detained, so far, include a from Los Angeles County who was detained in June 2025 and deported to Guatemala; a who, along with his father, was detained at an immigration hearing that same month and deported to Honduras; and who, in March, was detained without his hearing aids and deported to Colombia along with his mother and younger brother.

Medical professionals and advocates contend that no period of time in detention is safe for children. In 2016, a Department of Homeland Security Advisory Committee — the practice of detaining children with their parents as they await the outcome of their case — writing “detention is never in the best interest of children.”

“The kids that are in detention in these facilities, they’re losing their childhoods every single day that they’re in there,” said Wendy Cervantes, who oversees research and advocacy of immigrant families at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Law and Social Policy. 

A spokesperson from the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement to EdSource that this data is “being cherry-picked” to “peddle a false narrative.” ICE, the spokesperson said, is “not targeting children.”

“ICE does not separate families,” the unidentified DHS spokesperson said. “Parents are asked if they want to be removed with their children or ICE will place the children with a safe person the parent designates.” 

What the data shows

EdSource analyzed federal detainment data obtained by the Deportation Data Project at UC Berkeley and UCLA capturing federal detainments between October 2022 and March 2026. The analysis found: 

• There were 666 Californian children detained during the Trump administration. Of those, 408 children — or 61% — were deported. Under the Biden administration, 8% were ultimately deported.��
• Nationally, children have been held longer in detention under Trump than under Biden. The median length of detention jumped from one day under Biden to eight days under Trump. This does not include 335 children who had not yet been released from detention as of March 11, the last day for which data was available.
• Nationally, the average number of children in detention jumped nearly 10-fold under Trump, due in part to these longer detention stays. Under the last year of the Biden administration, there were, on average, 23 children held in detention each day. During Trump’s first year of his second term, that figure rose to 219.

The Trump administration is going after “the worst of the worst,” including pedophiles and rapists, a DHS spokesperson said. 

“Many of the individuals that are counted as ‘non-criminals’ are actually terrorists, human rights abusers, gangsters and more; they just don’t have a rap sheet in the U.S.,” the DHS spokesperson said. “Further, every single one of these individuals committed a crime when they came into this country illegally.”

According to EdSource’s analysis of ICE’s data, none of the 666 detained children in California under Trump had any felonies or previous convictions listed. Twelve minors were listed as having pending criminal charges, including three girls between ages 6 and 9. The nature of those pending charges is not disclosed. The ICE data does not include information about any connected family members or their cases.

During his second term, Trump reopened family detention facilities, including the South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley and the Karnes County Immigration Processing Center in Texas. In California, 250 detained children were ultimately sent to these family facilities.

A 12-year-old from Los Angeles, identified by the initials G.S., gave describing their experience living inside the South Texas Family Residential Center during a 64-day detainment with their parents and younger sister.

The child said ICE agents detained the family during a routine ICE check-in in Los Angeles. The family lost their apartment and belongings, according to the May 22 declaration. The status of the child and their family is unclear.

“It makes me feel hopeless to be here for so long, because now it’ll take me and my whole family a long time to get back to normal because of how much money and education we have lost,” the child said in their declaration. “If I could change one thing here, it would be to shut down the whole facility.”

Trump vs. Biden

One major difference between the Trump and Biden presidencies has been the number of children who arrived at the border. Of the 5,676 children detained in California between October 2022 and when Trump started his second term, 94% were apprehended at the border.

Biden prioritized placing some of the unaccompanied minors who arrived at the border with sponsors, Cervantes said, and ended the practice of family detention that resumed under Trump. Cervantes said the Biden administration largely followed . 

The 1997 agreement provided rights for immigrant children in U.S. custody and prohibited most detentions from lasting more than 20 days. The declaration from the detained Los Angeles minor is one of several included from children and parents in a lawsuit claiming their rights under the Flores agreement have been violated.

Attorneys representing the Trump administration in this case in June 2025 that conditions at detention centers for children have “drastically improved” since the original agreement. Referencing the high number of immigrants at the border, the administration said the Flores Settlement Agreement “hamstrung the government in addressing this catastrophic illegal migration.”

Apprehension in California

During the first year of Trump’s second term, adults were detained in California’s interior at more than four times the rate they were held during the last year of Biden’s administration, while the rate of child detainments rose by 90%.

California has passed laws and issued guidance with the aim of shielding schools from federal immigration enforcement. For instance, under California law, school officials .

In , parents, teachers and neighbors have formed rapid-response networks to report sightings of ICE agents for students and their families to avoid while commuting to and from school.

The sites of some immigration enforcement operations, such as job sites, may be more likely to target adults than children. However, Cervantes notes that some teens working at restaurants or as lifeguards at pools have been apprehended in ICE raids while they’re on the job. She also disputes the Trump administration’s claim that children have not been targets of immigration enforcement. 

Children may not be detained at the same rates that adults are, but medical experts warn that any time spent in detention is too long for their well-being.

Shortly after Trump began his second term, medical professionals to the president and then-Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem warning that “detention itself poses a threat to child health.” 

“We have endless amounts of research and expert testimony on how harmful detention is to children,” said Michelle Brané, who was the immigration detention ombudsman under the Biden administration, and now leads the nonprofit Together and Free, which supports asylum-seeking families. “You see kids with extreme depression. You see kids really regressing, kids going back to wetting the bed after they’ve been trained for years.”

Going Deeper

The Deportation Data Project collects U.S. government immigration enforcement datasets obtained via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. EdSource analyzed this data with a focus on how immigration enforcement is affecting children in California.

The participants in the project are academics and attorneys, including co-founders Graeme Blair, a professor of political science at UCLA; David Hausman, a professor of law at UC Berkeley and attorney Amber Quereshi.

This dataset from the U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement contains anonymized individual level data. It contains data about arrests, detention stays and detention rates in individual facilities, largely from Oct. 1, 2022, during Biden’s term until March 11, 2026 during Trump’s second term. 

A spokesperson from the Department of Homeland Security said that neither they nor ICE have verified the accuracy, methodology or analysis of the Deportation Data Project and its results. 

Hausman noted that it has posted the original data obtained directly from ICE.

“These are ICE’s own records of who is arrested, detained, and deported,” Hausman wrote in a statement to EdSource. “We have posted the data and code underlying the analysis. We welcome any specific feedback.”

This ICE data from the Deportation Data Project does not include the city or state of residence for those individuals who were arrested or detained. This makes it difficult to determine with precision how many Californians are being affected directly by enforcement operations. Additionally, many of the over 700,000 arrests nationally in the data set have blanks where there should be information about the state or area where an apprehension took place.

EdSource’s analysis relied primarily on a set of more than 1 million detention stays nationally. Every recorded individual stay in the ICE detention system has a list of codes corresponding to detention facilities. Our data analysis counts those who were first detained in a California detention facility as being detained in California.

California is a border state. A hallmark of the Trump administration’s immigration policy has been a shift from the border to deporting immigrants who are living in the interior of the country. So it was important to determine whether someone had been detained as a part of border enforcement. We used the same methodology as the Deportation Data Project to distinguish between an arrest at the border or one that occurred in the interior. We counted an arrest as happening at the border if it involved U.S. Customs and Border Protection, including Border Patrol or the Coast Guard.

Determining the age of those Californians who were detained was more straightforward. We have the birth year of those who were detained, as well as the date that an individual was booked into a facility. If the difference between those years was less than 18, this analysis counts them as a child. Because we do not know the exact birth dates of each individual, 666 children may be an undercount.

None of the data connects family members to one another.

This story was originally published by . Sign up for their .

EdSource Reporter Zaidee Stavely and Data Journalist Daniel J. Willis contributed to this story.

The U.S. Department of Education may no longer be able to fully support students, it says in an internal report that lays bare the full extent of the Trump Administration’s first round of government cuts.

The department lost about 40% of its staff from the day Trump was inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2025 through March 31, 2025, but certain subdepartments were hit harder, according to the report released last week. The Office of English Language Acquisition, which served immigrant students, was gutted, leaving one employee, according to . The department also terminated contracts and grants totaling roughly $2 billion. 

Although the report was internal, conducted by the education department’s Office of Inspector General, it is incomplete. Department staff did not comply with all the inspector general’s requests and cancelled interviews. As a result, the report says that many of its key findings are not definitive and that the total number of layoffs, the impact of those cuts, and the reasons for terminating certain contracts and grants remain unclear.   

The report also says that because of the cuts, the education department may no longer be able to administer Congressionally appropriated dollars or oversee federal education law, including the distribution of financial aid, investigations and data analyses. 

“According to the Department of Education’s own inspector general, the rapid elimination of nearly 1,600 staff, including those responsible for teacher training, student mental health programs, and legally required oversight functions, raises serious questions about whether the department can still meet its obligations to students,” said Kindra Britt, director of communications and strategy for . “These are not bureaucratic losses; they have real consequences for real kids.”

The report only includes cuts through March 31, 2025, and the education department has continued to cut staff and terminate grants and contracts since then. A number of grants have also been restored . The Trump Administration has slowly transferred many education services to other federal agencies, including the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Treasury Department. This year, the sole remaining staff member supporting English language acquisition elsewhere in the department and the work was transferred to the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education. That office is now managed, in part, by the .

“The Department of Education is focused on returning education to the states while preserving critical funding and reducing unnecessary bureaucracy that can slow support to students and families,” wrote Kirsten Baesler, assistant secretary of the department’s elementary and secondary education office. “English Learners should never be treated as a siloed program, set aside as an afterthought.” 

In a statement, Scott Roark, a public information officer with California Department of Education, said the state remains focused on helping students, regardless of the administration’s efforts to “disrupt services and safeguards” and to “impose a national ideology on local schools.” He said schools directly impacted by these disruptions should contact the state’s education department for help. 

Is the U.S. Education Department more efficient? 

Soon after his inauguration, Trump signed executive orders and directives which proposed ways to make government more efficient. The U.S. Education Department, spurred on by those orders, sent out offers to all federal employees saying they could resign and stay on payroll for a few months. Later, in March 2025, the department began laying off workers.   

The cuts were uneven across the education department’s 17 offices, according to the Inspector General’s recent report: The Institute of Education Services, which conducts research, and the Office of the Under Secretary, which oversees many higher education programs, lost over 80% of their employees, much like the Office of English Language Acquisition. The 14 employees in the Office of Legislative and Congressional Affairs were untouched. The Office of Inspector General is an independent entity and did not review itself.

Whether those cuts have created any efficiencies is up for debate.

Sharon Bonney, the chief executive of , a national organization representing adult education programs, said she primarily interacts with the education department’s Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education, which lost about 30% of its staff in the first few months of 2025, according to the report.

“I haven’t seen them miss a beat. I have seen more efficiencies,” said Bonney. “In the past I would send an email, it would take three weeks to respond to, and now, two hours later, I have a response.”

For Edgar Lampkin, the chief executive of the California Association for Bilingual Education, the effects have been “devastating.” 

California still struggles to serve its more than 1 million English language learners, in bilingual education, and recent efforts to improve California’s bilingual education have received .

Lampkin’s association, along with the advocacy coalition , has long received federal grants, sometimes totaling as much as $1 million annually, to train bilingual teachers across the state. “Those grants are gone,” he said — and the Trump Administration won’t see the full impacts of its actions, he added. “The effects of education are normally 10 plus years ahead.” 

This article was and was republished under the license.

In a 6-3 decision, the conservative court said that West Virginia and Idaho did not break the law when they passed legislation prohibiting trans athletes from competing against biological women and girls. 

Becky-Pepper Jackson, a transgender 10th grader and track athlete in West Virginia, argued that such regulations are “unreasonable.” 

“We disagree,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh , bringing his perspective as a girls’ to the case. “Separate sports teams for biological males and biological females are reasonable: Given the inherent physical differences between the sexes, allowing only biological females to play on women’s and girls’ teams can reduce the risk of physical injury and ensure fair competition.”

Attorneys who represented Jackson and Boise State University transgender student Lindsay Hecox called the opinion a “heartbreaking ruling” and “deeply harmful.” The decision, however, doesn’t settle an ongoing legal debate over whether Title IX requires that participation in sports be based on biological sex determined at birth. 

“I’m not terribly surprised by the outcome, given the court’s opinions in the last year,” said Jenny Denny, a specializing in education and Title IX compliance. “I think we could read the writing on the wall.”

Last year, the court upheld a Tennessee law prohibiting gender affirming care for minors, and in April, conservatives sided with California parents who argued that districts should alert parents if their child wants to change their gender identity.

But she said the court’s opinion did not redefine Title IX to suit the administration. 

“Using a sports analogy, which is fitting for today, it’s not a slam dunk for the U.S. Department of Education,” she said. “I think we’ll see the Department of Education cherry pick some language from the opinion today, but it still doesn’t give a clear answer.”

The decision doesn’t prevent states like California from maintaining policies that allow trans athletes to compete in line with their gender identity. But it also means the administration will likely continue its to prevent trans-inclusive policies through and threats to strip federal education funds from districts. 

Education Secretary Linda McMahon suggested as much in her comments on the ruling.

“This is a tremendous victory,” she said, “and we look forward to ensuring that every educational institution in America abides by the law of the land.” 

The department’s enforcement actions have been based on an President Donald Trump signed last year, but now officials will likely apply the court’s opinion to any future effort to rewrite the Title IX rule, said Joshua Dunn, executive director of the Institute of American Civics at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. He frequently writes legal commentary for EdNext. 

He agreed that whether Title IX allows schools to include trans athletes in girls’ sports is still “an open question.”

Beth Parlato, senior legal counsel for the conservative Independent Women’s Law Center, called the opinion a “huge win,” but added, “There’s more work to do.”

Congress, she said, needs to “do its job” and pass legislation that would apply to all states.

In a partial dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by the other two liberals on the court, agreed with Kavanaugh on Title IX. But she said the majority should have sent Jackson’s case back to the lower courts for further “factual findings about the state of the scientific debate” under the equal protection claim. 

“A restrained approach, based on all relevant facts, is particularly necessary when the court is faced with a consequential decision of constitutional dimension,” she wrote.

While Jackson will likely not be able to compete in track this fall, Andrew Ortiz, senior policy attorney at the Transgender Law Center, said Tuesday’s decision won’t have a major impact. because there were already so few trans students participating in sports in the 28 states that tried to ban their participation. In those states, intramural sports and private schools, “could still be options,” he said. While the cases now go back to the lower courts, he expects the states to “pretty quickly” prevail in their efforts to enforce their laws.

‘Back of the pack’

As is often the pattern, the justices released opinions with the most nationwide impact at the end of their term, one in which Trump’s agenda, from immigration reform to voting laws, has . While Hecox and Jackson challenged the laws in their states before Trump took office, the administration took part in the case, arguing that states shouldn’t have to carve out a special exception for transgender athletes even if, as their attorneys argued, their physical advantages have been diminished by puberty blockers or drugs to suppress testosterone.

In fact, several months after the oral arguments, Michael R. Williams, West Virginia’s solicitor general, argued that the opposite is happening. In May, he that Jackson finished fourth in discus and first in shot put in a statewide track and field competition. 

“As a high-school sophomore, B.P.J. is not finishing ‘near the back of the back,’ “ , referencing the from Jackson’s legal team in the case. Jackson “is instead defeating every — or nearly every — female in the state in these events.”

But LGBTQ advocates, like the , argue that because transgender athletes represent such of students participating in sports, it’s misleading to say they are dominating competitions or “stealing” first place medals from women and girls. 

The debate continued at the appeals court level even while the Supreme Court deliberated in the West Virginia and Idaho cases.

In April, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit an advocacy group, , in their argument that a Minnesota policy is discriminatory because it allows trans athletes to compete in sports consistent with their gender identity. 

The court said that Trump’s executive order and the administration’s actions against states and districts didn’t settle the legal dispute over the issue. 

“The executive branch’s views on that question may guide its own enforcement approach,” wrote Raymond Gruender, a George W. Bush appointee. “But they cannot independently establish a ‘strong likelihood’ that [the athlete’s] participation violated Title IX or its implementing regulations.”

Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, a member of the House education committee, filed three articles of impeachment against McMahon, noting the secretary’s “willful intent to unilaterally dismantle and eliminate the Department of Education.”

Bonamici a week ago, prompting a swift response from McMahon defending her track record.

“It speaks volumes that House Democrats think an impeachable offense is working to improve student outcomes and reduce the federal bureaucracy,” she .

The resolution accuses McMahon of compromising the ability of the department to fulfill its duties. That’s also the conclusion that the department’s Inspector General reached in released Wednesday detailing how the administration has slashed the agency’s staff by 40% and canceled billions of dollars in grants and contracts. 

McMahon has been forced to backtrack. The department currently has several job openings posted, including and .

Democrats have introduced articles of impeachment against multiple members of President Donald Trump’s cabinet, including Health and Human Services Secretary and Defense Secretary . But historically the attempts have rarely succeeded. Two years ago, the House impeached Biden Homeland Security for what members said was a failure to stop migrants from crossing the border, but the Senate dismissed the two articles against him.  Before him, the last cabinet member to be impeached was William W. Belknap, secretary of war under President Ulysses S. Grant, on , in 1876. 

Critics of Betsy DeVos, Trump’s first education secretary, called for her to and some groups advocating impeachment. But lawmakers never took formal steps to do so. A federal judge, however, held her in 2019 and fined her $100,000 when she continued student debt collections in violation of a court order. The department .

While some Republicans have also been critical of McMahon, Rep. Tim Walberg, the Michigan Republican who chairs the education committee, called the action “political theater.”

“Secretary McMahon is doing exactly what voters elected President Trump to do: rein in a bloated bureaucracy and put students, parents, and taxpayers first,” he said in a statement.

The effort is also largely “symbolic” and unlikely to succeed, said Jeffrey Henig, a professor emeritus at Teachers College, Columbia University. 

“Symbolism can be important, and a case can be made for using this as a way to draw attention to the dismantling of the department,” he said.

The resolution says McMahon has “decimated” the agency and “created a culture of fear and chaos” that has harmed education programs.

Specifically, the articles of impeachment are:

1. Willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law

The text cites McMahon’s actions to transfer responsibilities, which under law rest with the Education Department, to other agencies. Just last week, she announced that the office overseeing special education would move to the Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of Civil Rights would transfer to the Justice Department.

2. False statements before Congress

The resolution accuses McMahon of lying to Congress during her confirmation hearing that she would follow the law in disbursing education funds appropriated by Congress. Instead, the text reads, she has defended the cancellation of several research contracts and discontinued grants for programs like community schools.

3. Breach of public trust

Again focusing on funding, the resolution states that the administration held up payments for services like migrant education and afterschool care and put “critical” K-12 programs at risk.

Bonamici said parents, especially those of students with disabilities are “distraught” over splitting up the department. “They are asking us to take action to stop these illegal transfers,” she said. “To them I say, ‘We hear you.’ “

Michael Petrilli, president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative think tank, suggested McMahon’s actions aren’t grounds for impeachment.

“The race to the bottom continues, in this case regarding the definition of ‘high crimes and misdemeanors,’ ” he said. “This is just politics, but I can appreciate that Congressional Democrats don’t feel like they have any other recourse right now.” 

Federal officials Tuesday that the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services will move to the Department of Health and Human Services, while the Office for Civil Rights will shift to the Department of Justice. It’s a decision that’s been in the making for more than a year, as the administration has attempted to dismantle the Education Department .

At a press conference Tuesday, senior department officials as new partnerships between the agencies. The officials said the changes won’t impact or reduce students’ rights, but instead improve efficiency. Senior department officials participated in the briefing on the condition that the speakers wouldn’t be identified by name. Education Secretary Linda McMahon did not take part.

Both the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services and the Office for Civil Rights will retain some original functions, according to federal . But many specifics, such as staffing decisions and timelines, are still under discussion, the officials said. 

Special education advocates have protested that moving programs, including civil rights oversight, out of the Education Department will harm students with disabilities. 

In a  Tuesday, McMahon acknowledged that too many families must still fight for timely and appropriate special education services for their children. She said the changes will “break down bureaucratic barriers and strengthen the coordination of resources to improve programs.”

“It should not require herculean effort to obtain what the law guarantees,” McMahon said. “As the Trump administration scales back federal micromanagement when it hinders success, we are equally committed to bolstering the efficacy of federal oversight where it is essential.”

The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services oversees the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a landmark set of statutes that guarantee more than 8 million children with disabilities the right to attend public school. Critics say moving responsibility to HHS means taking oversight away from experts in specialized instruction and handing it to an agency ill-equipped to administer non-medical programs.

“Moving IDEA oversight into HHS pushes students with disabilities toward a medical model, where disability is treated as a diagnosis to manage instead of a natural part of human life,” Robyn Linscott, a director at The Arc of the United States, said in a Tuesday press release. “When that mindset drives education decisions, students are more likely to be segregated, underestimated or treated as separate from the school community.”

The Education Department the special ed office already overlaps with HHS programs for people with disabilities.

The Office for Civil Rights has been a key avenue of relief for parents unable to get services for their children through complaints filed with their state, mediation, administrative hearings or due process cases. Families in states lacking local enforcement of special education complaints depend on OCR to investigate discrimination.

McMahon said in her statement that the partnership between OCR and the Justice Department will provide more responsive and coordinated enforcement of civil rights laws.

“OCR and DOJ will combine their expertise and capacity to bolster evaluation, investigation, resolution of complaints and, above all, enforce critical protections for all students,” she said.

Senior education department officials said during Tuesday’s press conference that OCR will refer complaints to the Justice Department for evaluation, investigation and resolution. The agency will still be in charge of case settlements, civil rights data collection and state assistance, and will make final determinations on whether to pursue action by referring cases to the Justice Department for enforcement.

Though McMahon said the moves will improve student and family outcomes, The American Federation of Government Employees Local 252, which represents 2,000 Education Department staffers, said the shift is breaking down government processes instead of streamlining them. 

“This isn’t efficiency — it’s chaos. Previous interagency agreements divvying up both P-12 and higher education programs to other federal agencies have led to massive delays in congressionally mandated funding and confusion for federal employees and the public alike,” union President Rachel Gittleman said in an emailed statement. “That’s an insult to the millions of students and families who rely on these services and the taxpayers who count on federal oversight to prevent waste, fraud and abuse.” 

The Trump administration is using interagency agreements to circumvent to close the Education Department, a move that House members have warned would “create inefficiencies” and “cause delays and administrative challenges.” When the Department of Labor picked up career and technical education last year, for example, some states had to wait months to access millions of dollars in funding.

In the past year, major contracts for the federally funded Comprehensive Centers and Regional Educational Laboratories have been canceled, then reinstated. Calling the structure of Comprehensive Centers “duplicative” and “confusing,” the U.S. Department of Education solicited public comment on a redesign. The 2027 budget proposal released by the White House in April zeros out both Comprehensive Centers and RELs entirely.�� 

Watching this unfold with concern are state education agencies—the primary recipients of this expertise on how to comply with federal laws and improve education outcomes. We recently interviewed state agency leaders in 14 states to hear about their experience with federal technical assistance: What works? What doesn’t? What can they not afford to lose? Our sample is not nationally representative, and the Department of Education is conducting its own broader need-sensing. But offers a ground-level view that can help inform the choices ahead. 

Leaders most often named three functions of federal technical assistance as valuable and not easily replaced.  

The first: providing specialized expertise to help implement the most effective instructional practices. Smaller agencies, in particular, lack staff experts on topics such as evidence-based literacy instruction or supporting students with dyslexia. They also lack the resources to evaluate whether changes in practice are occurring in schools. “I can count on one hand the number of PhDs we have, and I think it’s two,” one leader told us. “We just don’t have the capacity to dig into the issues that we know we want to.” 

The second was cross-state networking. Technical assistance providers often broker connections between individuals in similar roles across state lines, connections that leaders would not have made on their own. This creates opportunities to learn from one another and exchange promising practices. “It is completely a siloed job out here in our region,” one said, “and having access to [other] people who are doing the work is the biggest benefit.”  

The third was providing authoritative guidance on compliance with federal law that is specific to states’ own systems, staff and rules. This function matters especially in the context of efforts to give more autonomy to states. If states are going to take on greater responsibility for how federal education funds are spent, they will need timely, expert help navigating complex requirements in federal laws — which remain in place even as other aspects of education policy are largely “returned to the states.” 

Given the restructuring and budget proposals, there is real uncertainty about what technical assistance will look like when the dust settles. Leaders we spoke with provided caveats about some of the ideas that have been floated and suggested improvements they would like to see. 

Some expressed frustration with bureaucratic delays in Education Department processes — particularly around selecting providers and initiating new projects. Yet they were still skeptical about the idea of giving each state funds to contract for its own technical assistance. “If I’ve got a million bucks, and I want to build this thing, requests for information go out today, it’s likely the first opportunity that that work begins is probably at least a year out,” one leader said. “This is state procurement; that’s the rule, not the exception.”  

State leaders also worried that direct contracting would fragment the national expertise and cross-state coordination a federal system provides. They preferred centralized systems more responsive to states’ priorities over a mandate to “do it yourself.” 

The ongoing push to hand education functions to other agencies, some leaders cautioned, would result in more complexity, not less. “Instead of having five contacts at ED, we’re going to have two contacts at the Department of Labor… [another at] Health and Human Services… [another at] Commerce,” one said. “I don’t actually think it’s going to create more efficiencies.” 

Other state agency leaders wanted the federal government to lead more boldly on evidence-based practices. The Department of Education, one told us, “has never really put their stake in the ground on what is good instruction, what is good assessment, what are good materials.”  

In all, the state leaders we interviewed would welcome reforms that cut red tape and give them more voice in shaping the support they receive. At the same time, they wanted to retain an infrastructure that can deliver specialized research support, cross-state leadership, and state-specific compliance guidance.  

As the decision point nears, their experience offers a roadmap for getting the details right — one grounded in the daily realities of running a state education system.

But one line in the department’s own should give parents and policymakers pause. It says the department “would not establish goals and performance indicators” for the MEGA program. 

If Washington wants to throw a sprawling set of K-12 priorities in one pot, it needs to say how taxpayers are supposed to know whether the meal was worth the bill.

At its heart, MEGA would consolidate programs into a single state formula grant, with at least 25% reserved for literacy and 25% for mathematics.

That matters because the programs include support for teacher development, after-school programs, state assessments, homeless students, rural schools, school safety, magnet schools, civics, arts education and family engagement. 

All are important programs that are being compressed into a budget that sets aside huge chunks for reading and math and leaves less room for everything else. And once those line items disappear into a single grant, the public will have a harder time seeing what states funded, what they skipped and what any of it bought.

That is a strange place to economize, because the federal cost of keeping score is tiny. Public schools spent $818.2 billion in current expenditures in fiscal year 2023, according to the latest . Before any of the proposed cuts take effect, the main federal testing-and-data lines totaled , , and . That is $694.8 million all told, or about 85 cents for every $1,000 schools spend.

And yet that sliver buys some of the most important information in American education. As Robin Lake wrote, the newest were alarming and pandemic recovery remains uneven. 91ɬ��’s interactive on widening achievement gaps shows lower-performing students falling further behind in nearly every state. These are precisely the kinds of problems that become visible only because the federal government mandated metrics.

To be fair, federal education policy has accumulated layers of programs, rules and paperwork; and there is a legitimate argument for giving states more discretion. But even stronger advocates of local autonomy than I have argued for a truer national yardstick so that flexibility does not become opacity. Simpler funding and clearer public evidence belong together.

The Department’s own documents underscore this contradiction. Under the MEGA proposal, states and districts would still be expected to meet federal reporting requirements under . But the new grant itself would arrive without its own goals or indicators, even as the administration describes it as an “evidence-based” investment in literacy and numeracy. 

Some of the programs being consolidated currently have specific purposes and, in some cases, performance measures of their own. , for instance, are explicitly targeted to literacy and report performance information. Under MEGA, that specificity would give way to a much broader grant with no specified performance indicators.

This is especially hard to justify because the budget would not only merge programs but also hollow out dedicated measurement lines. A federal line for state assessments would even as states are still expected to keep testing and reporting. The budget would cut federal education statistics from and reduce NAEP and the National Assessment Governing Board from . 

MEGA is still only a budget request, and Congress rejected similar cuts last year. But proposals like this matter because they reveal what Washington now considers the tiny slice of education spending focused on accountability as dispensable. Programs such as school safety, rural education, homeless students and family engagement would have to compete inside the unreserved share of MEGA. 

If the administration believes states can do more with fewer federal silos, then it should welcome a short public scorecard showing where the money went and what improved.

That scorecard need not be complicated. Congress could require states to publish their MEGA plans in a common format and report a short, comparable set of outcomes for reading, math, attendance, graduation and subgroup performance. None of that would prevent flexibility. It would simply ensure that outcomes remain visible. No one should have to reverse-engineer state budgets to find out whether a grant marketed as a literacy investment actually strengthened reading outcomes.

The administration says MEGA would move decision-making closer to home. Fine. But if the money moves closer to home, the metrics should move with it. Policymakers and researchers need a short public scorecard and a common reporting template. If MEGA is going to remake federal schooling, it can do what schools ask of children every day. Namely, show your work.

You cannot claim to support literacy while slashing the very programs that help children become readers, stay healthy and succeed in school.

For more than two decades, I have worked alongside families as a social worker, nonprofit leader and education advocate. Today, I lead Families In Schools, a nonprofit that equips parents with the tools, knowledge and confidence to support their children’s learning. I have seen firsthand what happens when families have the support they need — and what happens when they do not.

The parents we work with remind me of my own parents. My father came to this country through the Bracero program and, like so many parents, trusted public schools to create opportunities for his children. I was the first in my family to graduate from college. That should not be the exception for children in communities like mine.

I benefited from programs that helped me succeed. Today, too many families risk losing those same opportunities.

The president’s Fiscal Year 2027 budget proposal would take 17 education programs that families rely on and roll them into a single block grant, cutting their funding from $6.47 billion to just $2 billion.

This is not reform. It is a dismantling.

Under this proposal, funding would no longer be dedicated to specific programs. Instead, states would receive significantly reduced amounts of money, with broad discretion over how it is spent. There would be no requirement to maintain investments in afterschool activities that keep children safe while parents work, college access programs like TRIO and Gear UP, community schools, family engagement efforts, academic supports and services for homeless children.

Programs like these aid more than 26 million students from low-income families. With reduced funding and no dedicated protections, they would be pitted against one another, and many would be at risk of disappearing altogether. But these programs are not extras; they are lifelines.

Families and educators know exactly what these cuts could mean.

They could mean parents working a second job scrambling to find somewhere safe for their child to go after school. They could mean English learners losing critical assistance in the classroom, or community schools having to cut back on health care, counseling, food assistance and other basic services that enable children to learn.

And they could mean family engagement — one of the most powerful drivers of student success — being pushed even further to the margins.

Parents are children’s first teachers and their most fierce and stalwart advocates. Literacy development begins at birth, in play and conversation with caregivers. Kids learn to love reading when people they love read to them. If they are struggling or falling behind, it’s usually the parents or caregivers who fight to make sure they get the help they need, whether that means demanding testing, changing schools or finding tutoring and afterschool activities. Children do not learn in a vacuum. They learn best when their families have the tools, information and resources to be active partners in their education.

The programs on the chopping block have been in place for decades, and they define “evidence-based.” They have been evaluated, showing improvements in attendance, academic outcomes and the ability of families to better support their children’s success.

Walking away from them puts that progress at risk.

States and local districts cannot absorb cuts of this . Families cannot simply make up the difference with time they do not have, money they cannot spare or resources that may not exist.

Parents, educators and policymakers all want children to read, succeed in school and build better futures for themselves. But literacy cannot just be a slogan, and literacy skills cannot be learned if children’s overall developmental needs are not met.

If children are truly to succeed, Congress should reject the president’s proposed cuts and protect the programs students and families rely on every day.

As immigration authorities carry out what President Donald Trump has promised will be the largest mass deportation operation in U.S. history, several states are passing laws to keep children out of foster care when their detained parents have no family or friends available to take temporary custody of them.

The federal government doesn’t track how many children have entered foster care because of immigration enforcement actions, leaving it unclear how often it happens. In Oregon, as of February two children had been placed in foster care after being separated from their parents in immigration detention cases, according to Jake Sunderland, a spokesperson for the Oregon Department of Human Services.

“Before fall 2025, this simply had never happened before,” Sunderland said.

As of mid-February, nearly by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The record 73,000 people in detention in January represented an compared with one year before. According to , parents of 11,000 children who are U.S. citizens were detained from the beginning of Trump’s term through August.

The news outlet NOTUS that at least 32 children of detained or deported parents had been placed in foster care in seven states.

Sandy Santana, executive director of Children’s Rights, a legal advocacy organization, said he thinks the actual number is much higher.

“That, to us, seems really, really low,” he said.

Separation from a parent is deeply traumatic for children and can lead to , including post-traumatic stress disorder. Prolonged, intense stress can lead to more-frequent infections in children and developmental issues. That “toxic stress” is also associated with damage to areas of the brain responsible for learning and memory, , a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News.

, and amended existing laws during Trump’s first term to allow guardians to be granted temporary parental rights for immigration enforcement reasons. Now the enforcement surge that began after Trump returned to office last year has prompted a new wave of state responses.

In New Jersey, lawmakers are considering to amend a state law that allows parents to nominate standby, or temporary, guardians in the cases of death, incapacity, or debilitation. The bill would add separation due to federal immigration enforcement as another allowable reason.

Nevada and California passed laws last year to protect families separated by immigration enforcement actions. California’s law, called the , allows parents to nominate guardians and share custodial rights, instead of having them suspended, while they’re detained. They regain their full parental rights if they are released and are able to reunite with their children.

There are significant legal barriers to reunification once a child is placed in state custody, said Juan Guzman, director of children’s court and guardianship at the Alliance for Children’s Rights, a legal advocacy organization in Los Angeles.

If a parent’s child is placed in foster care and the parent cannot participate in required court proceedings because they are in detention or have been deported, it’s less likely they will be able to reunite with their child, Guzman said.

are U.S. citizens who live with a parent or family member who does not have legal immigration status, according to research from the Brookings Institution, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank. Within that group, 2.6 million children have two parents lacking legal status.

Santana said he expects the number of family separation cases to grow as the Trump administration continues its immigration enforcement campaign, putting more children at risk of being placed in foster care.

the agency to make efforts to facilitate detained parents’ participation in family court, child welfare, or guardianship proceedings, but Santana said it’s uncertain whether ICE is complying with those rules.

ICE officials did not respond to requests for comment for this report.

Before the change in California’s law, the only way a parent could share custodial rights with another guardian was if the parent was terminally ill, Guzman said.

If parents create a preparedness plan and identify an individual to assume guardianship of their children, the state child welfare agency can begin the process of placing the children with that individual without opening a formal foster care case, he added.

While Nevada lawmakers expanded an existing guardianship law last year to include immigration enforcement, the measure requires the parents to file notarized paperwork with the secretary of state’s office, an administrative step that may be burdensome, said Cristian Gonzalez-Perez, an attorney at Make the Road Nevada, a nonprofit that provides resources to immigrant communities.

Gonzalez-Perez said some immigrants are still hesitant to fill out government forms, out of fear that ICE might access their information and target them. He reassures community members that the state forms are secure and can be accessed only by hospitals and courts.

The Trump administration has taken through the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the IRS, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and other entities.

Gonzalez-Perez and Guzman said that not enough immigrant parents know their rights. Nominating a temporary guardian and creating a plan for their families is one way they can prevent feelings of helplessness, Gonzalez-Perez said.

“Folks don’t want to talk about it, right?” Guzman said. “The parent having to speak to a child about the possibility of separation, it’s scary. It’s not something anybody wants to do.”

is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.

Sacramento City Unified and La Mesa-Spring Valley school districts and Taft College in California are among six educational institutions in the U.S. that had civil rights settlements terminated by the U.S. Department of Education on Monday, according to the 

The agreements, negotiated by previous administrations, were meant to uphold protections for transgender students. Now that they have been terminated, the colleges and school districts are no longer obligated to continue measures such as faculty training or allowing students to use the bathrooms, names or pronouns that align with their gender identity, the Associated Press reported.

The termination of the agreements is an effort to enforce President Donald Trump’s executive order that the government recognize only a person’s sex assigned at birth. 

In Sacramento City Unified, that means the district will no longer have to abide by a 2024 settlement that requires it to provide training on Title IX policies to school administrators, teachers guidance counselors and school resource officers, according to the  

The settlement stems from a 2022 complaint by a transgender student who said a teacher refused to use his preferred pronouns and that an administrator also referred to him incorrectly. The Office for Civil Rights, under the Biden administration, agreed with the student and directed the school district to take corrective measures, according to The Bee.

Sacramento City Unified said Monday it “remains committed to the support of our LGBTQ+ students and staff.”

The district won’t decide whether to rescind the policies until it learns whether it will impact its federal funding, according to The Bee. The district faces a $170 million budget deficit and threats of state takeover.

La Mesa-Spring Valley Unified Superintendent David Feliciano told the  that the decision would have no effect on district policies and procedures.

“We remain committed to ensuring a safe and supportive learning environment for all students,” he said.

Written in response to the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good during federal immigration operations, the song offered more than commentary. It interpreted a national crisis, asking listeners to confront what state power looks like when it arrives in neighborhoods, on sidewalks and in the lives of ordinary families. 

That is precisely why this moment belongs not only on playlists and opinion pages, but in civic education.

Since then, the political terrain has shifted, but not in ways that make the issue less urgent for schools. President Donald Trump Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem after months of political fallout surrounding the administration’s immigration crackdown. 

Around the same time, reporting showed that the administration had scaled back the most visible ICE tactics in Minneapolis, there from roughly 3,000 agents to about 650, and shifted toward more targeted operations after the public backlash. Arrests declined in February, but ICE remains active, and the economic and civic damage in Minneapolis continues.

The retreat matters. It suggests that public protest, documentation by witnesses, investigative reporting and political pressure forced a tactical recalibration. But it also underscores a deeper lesson for educators: Students are living through a period in which official narratives, video evidence, journalism, protest and art are colliding in real time. 

Schools cannot pretend these are merely political controversies happening somewhere else. They are contemporary case studies in how democracy works, how it fails and how citizens push back.

The arrest earlier this month of , a Nashville-based reporter for a Spanish-language news outlet, makes that lesson even harder to ignore. Rodriguez Florez had been covering immigration arrests in Tennessee. Then ICE detained her, despite her pending asylum case, valid work permit and marriage to a U.S. citizen. 

Moments like this one shed light on why protest music is produced in response to government actions to silence individuals, raising essential civic questions for students to consider: Who gets to document state power? What happens when the people telling a community’s story become vulnerable themselves? And how should a democracy respond when journalism, immigration status, and political retaliation appear to converge?

Springsteen’s song is not a lone artistic response. Recent in Rolling Stone traces a broader wave of anti-ICE protest music released in the wake of the Minneapolis operations. Billy Bragg wrote “City of Heroes.” NOFX released “Minnesota Nazis.” My Morning Jacket put out a benefit project, Peacelands, in solidarity with communities affected by ICE brutality. Bon Iver shared a live track to raise money for immigrant legal defense. Low Cut Connie and Dropkick Murphys have added their own contributions to this growing soundtrack of dissent.

Another Rolling Stone  places Springsteen’s song in a longer tradition of “instant protest songs,” linking it to works such as Woody Guthrie’s “,” written in response to a 1948 plane crash that killed 28 Mexican migrant farmworkers being deported; Nina Simone’s “” and Bob Dylan’s “,” written after the 1963 assassination of civil rights leader Medgar Evers; and Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young’s “,” about the Ohio National Guard’s killing of four Kent State University students protesting the Vietnam War.

This history is what makes this such a consequential educational moment. Protest songs are not simply cultural accessories to political events. They are historical artifacts, rhetorical arguments and emotional archives. They help listeners name what has happened, assign meaning to it and imagine what moral response is required. In classrooms, they can help students examine competing claims about law, order, belonging and dissent without reducing complex issues to partisan slogans. 

Analyzing protest music asks students to interpret voice, perspective, evidence, omission and historical context. These are not ideological activities designed to indoctrinate youth. They are learning opportunities to build critical thinking and civic literacy skills.

The question is not whether teachers should tell students what to think about Bruce Springsteen, ICE, Kristi Noem or the Trump administration. The question is whether students should have the chance to grapple with how democracies narrate force, how communities contest official accounts, and how music, journalism, and protest shape public understanding. 

In elementary school, that might mean introducing age-appropriate examples of peaceful protest and the role of songs in movements for fairness. In middle school, it could mean comparing lyrics with speeches or media accounts and asking what each includes, emphasizes, or leaves out. In high school, it could mean examining how protest music enters political life as argument, memory, and civic witness.

The broader lesson is that protest is not alien to American history; it is one of the ways people have always argued about freedom. From abolitionist songs to civil-rights anthems to Springsteen’s Minneapolis lament, music has carried democratic conflict across generations. 

It has helped individuals feel the stakes of policies they might otherwise encounter only as abstractions. It has translated public tragedy into public argument. And that argument, however uncomfortable, is not something schools should avoid. It is something students should be prepared to enter with the skills of engaging in productive and divergent thinking on complex civic issues.

At a moment when federal officials are trying to soften the optics of immigration enforcement without abandoning its underlying machinery, and when a journalist covering immigration can herself be detained, schools should resist the temptation to retreat into silence. Young people need more opportunities, not fewer, to interpret the music, reporting, speeches and images shaping public life around them.

A democracy worthy of the next generation depends on an informed citizenry capable of productive disagreement. Protest songs do not threaten that project. They give students one of the essential ways to practice it.

Dylan Lopez Contreras, the first New York City public school student detained by federal immigration officials during President Donald Trump’s second term, was released Tuesday night after spending 10 months in federal custody, according to his mother and his legal team.

Dylan, now 21, was a student at ELLIS Preparatory Academy, a Bronx school geared toward older, newly arrived immigrant students, and his arrest was one of the highest-profile early examples of an in immigration enforcement last year in which officers arrested immigrants in the hallways of federal court following their legal hearings. arrest.

Kristin Kepplinger, a spokesperson from the New York Legal Assistance Group, which had been representing Dylan in his immigration court case and federal habeas corpus lawsuit, said the reason for his release wasn’t yet clear, as they had yet to review his release documents.

His legal team was thankful to Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s administration and to the office of U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer who’d been advocating for his release, Kepplinger added.

Dylan’s federal habeas corpus petition was denied. An immigration judge also , but his lawyers appealed.

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security didn’t respond to a request for comment on Dylan’s release.

A native of Venezuela, Dylan first entered the country in 2024 through a program under former President Joe Biden that allowed migrants to make appointments to cross the border and seek asylum.

Dylan’s arrest quickly earned local and national attention, prompting former Mayor Eric Adams’ administration to file an amicus brief seeking his release, along with rallies and calls from national elected officials. Last month, Dylan’s mother, Raiza Contreras, attended the State of the Union with Sen. Chuck Schumer.

““[I’m] emotional,” Raiza told Chalkbeat in a brief interview Wednesday in Spanish. “I’m grateful to God first and foremost and to all the people who were present in this case.”

Gov. Kathy Hochul that she mentioned Dylan’s name in a recent meeting with Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan.

Mamdani said the city was “overjoyed” by Dylan’s release.

“Throughout this injustice, Dylan has shown remarkable strength, resilience, and courage,” the mayor said in a statement.

Even as federal immigration enforcement swept up other city students — some of whom subsequently — Dylan remained in custody in Western Pennsylvania for nearly a year. In a September , he described the frustration and depression of having his life put on hold.

Norma Vega, the principal of ELLIS, where staffers and helped coordinate legal and other forms of support for the family, said she believes the sustained public campaign for Dylan’s release paid off.

“It confirmed for me we did the right thing,” she said. “Keeping him in the public eye, he became the face of every immigrant youth across the country.”

She added: “It was about this kid who they [the federal government] inaccurately thought was alone … and how important it was for us to let them know he’s not alone.”

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

A federal judge in Massachusetts has halted enforcement of several key vaccine policies imposed by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., ruling that the Trump administration illegally overhauled a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention committee dedicated to issuing immunization recommendations.

The decision, which comes in response to a filed by the American Academy of Pediatrics last July, temporarily blocks the enforcement of all recommendations voted on by the panel. That includes the overhaul of a decades-old recommendation that all newborn babies receive a vaccine against , a push to emphasize the risks of and a ban on vaccine preservatives like .

The ruling also temporarily halts participation from 13 of the panel’s 15 members, complicating a meeting that was to begin later this week.

The CDC’s committee, known as the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, is charged with setting national guidelines around which people should be vaccinated against a wide range of preventable diseases and when those vaccines should be administered. The recommendations play a key role in determining which vaccines insurance companies are willing to cover and how accessible those immunizations are to the public.

Last June, Kennedy all 17 members of the committee and replaced them with a slate of hand-picked appointees, many of whom are seen as vaccine skeptics. In his Monday , District Court Judge Brian E. Murphy ruled that the Trump administration likely violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to appoint qualified, nonpartisan experts, as the panel’s charter requires.

By ignoring those requirements, “the Government has disregarded those methods and thereby undermined the integrity of its actions,” Murphy’s ruling reads.

Dr. Andrew Racine, the president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, celebrated the ruling, calling it “a historic and welcome outcome for children, communities, and pediatricians everywhere.”

“For decades, the AAP partnered closely with the federal government to advance our mission of attaining the optimal health and well-being of children and youth,” Racine added. “We would much prefer to return to that partnership and collaborate with federal healthcare agencies instead of litigating against them.”

A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Georgia Recorder maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jill Nolin for questions: info@georgiarecorder.com.

If you’ve been following the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, you’ve likely heard of Democrats’ calls for greater officer accountability, including banning face masks and mandating body cameras and publicly displayed IDs. For my latest story, I dig into a lesser-known demand: barring federal immigration agents from Head Start, child care and pre-K classrooms.

That was once standard practice but since President Donald Trump rescinded a rule last year shielding so-called sensitive locations from enforcement actions, those who provide education and care to the youngest learners report harrowing encounters with immigration officers. I’m a staff reporter covering for Mark this week and I spoke to several of those folks in Illinois, which was hit with the administration’s Operation Midway Blitz last fall.

In the news

The latest in ongoing FBI investigation into L.A. schools’ failed AI chatbot deal: A January 2023 meeting invite obtained by 91ɬ�� suggests senior staff were consulting with AllHere principals at district headquarters five months before the contract was approved. It also calls into question statements by schools chief Alberto Carvalho that he had no involvement in selecting the company represented by his close friend. | 

• Carvalho issued his first statement after an FBI raid on his home and office. The high-profile school leader, who’s been placed on paid leave, denied any wrongdoing. | 
  
• Sources say grand jury subpoenas have been issued seeking records from the Miami-Dade County Public Schools’s inspector general and a fundraising foundation overseen by Carvalho while he was the Miami superintendent. | 

Kids’ internet safety bill moves to House vote. Despite Democrats’ complaints of a “giant loophole” for Big Tech, a bill requiring online platforms to implement safeguards for minors has advanced to a full House vote. It would provide “easy-to-use parental tools” and limit addictive design features.��| 

A former Lakewood, Colorado, school security supervisor will serve 18 years to life in prison for sexually assaulting a 16-year-old student on and off school grounds over the course of two years. “His job was to ensure the safety of students,” said a deputy district attorney. “Instead … [he] manipulated a sixteen-year-old into sexual acts.” | 

As federal civil rights complaints languish, parents of disabled students look to states. Colorado lawmakers unanimously approved a bill that would expand the state education department’s ability to hear complaints tied to students’ disability accommodations. They’re part of a growing number of legislators nationwide who want their states to step in amid federal staffing cuts and mounting unresolved civil rights cases. | 

• Go deeper: For Decades, the Feds Were the Last, Best Hope for Special Ed Kids. What Happens Now? | 

Virginia has passed a bill barring schools from teaching Jan. 6 as a “peaceful protest.” Instead, it would be presented as “an unprecedented, violent attack on U.S. democratic institutions, infrastructure, and representatives for the purpose of overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election.”  | 

Private school choice but not for everyone. Texas has excluded about two dozen Islamic schools from its new $1 billion voucher program for allegedly being linked to terrorist groups, a decision that has led to a lawsuit and claims of anti-Muslim discrimination.| 

A $7 million tech effort meant to make Hawaiʻi schools safer by equipping teachers and principals with panic buttons and mobile apps never got off the ground. Two years after launching, only one school in the state has panic buttons — and it’s not using them.| 

ICYMI @The74

Emotional Support

Jebby, my handsome cockapoo, is very excited to hang up his jacket — and his booties — and sniff the spring air. 

When the Trump administration decimated the Education Department’s civil rights office last year, thousands of students waiting for relief from alleged racial and sexual discrimination in schools were left to languish. 

It turns out the move to sideline half of the Office for Civil Rights staff , according to a new report by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office. Nearly a year later, the Education Department still can’t say whether it saved a dime. 

GAO estimates the decision to place civil rights staffers on paid administrative leave, while simultaneously shuttering most of its regional offices, cost upwards of $38 million for the salaries and benefits of staffers who were kept home. 

“Other costs,” the government watchdog noted, “are unknown.” 

Without a full accounting of costs and savings, the watchdog concluded, the the shakeup improved efficiency, saved money or better served students — the very reasons used to justify the cuts in the first place. 

In the news

The latest in Trump’s immigration crackdown: Minnesota school districts and the state’s teachers union filed a lawsuit demanding reinstatement of a longstanding policy against immigration enforcement activities near schools and other “sensitive locations.” | 

• A Minnesota 11-year-old and her mother will be reunited with their family after being held for nearly a month in a Texas detention center after getting picked up by immigration agents on their way to school. | 
  
• The horrifying truth behind the immigration arrest of 5-year-old Liam Ramos: It wasn’t an accident. | 
  
  • The Columbia Heights school district where Liam is enrolled closed for a day this week after officials received a “racially and politically motivated” bomb threat. | 
    
• ‘None of this is OK’: Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz demanded in a letter that the federal government disclose how many of the state’s children have been detained as part of the immigration enforcement surge — and pleaded for agents to stay away from schools and bus stops. | 
  
• Cities could be compelled to cooperate with federal immigration officials in order to access federal funds for investigations into internet crimes against children, a lawsuit alleges. | 

Big Tech in the spotlight: As TikTok and Snap settle lawsuits centered on the damaging effects of social media on children, Meta and YouTube are gearing up for closely watched trials. The tech companies face allegations the apps were designed to keep kids hooked despite known harms to their well-being. | 

• Amazon reported hundreds of thousands of photos of child sexual abuse in its artificial intelligence training data — but the company’s refusal to say where it came from could hinder police efforts to track down perpetrators. |  
  
• As Democrat- and Republican-led states pass rules designed to protect children from the potential harms of AI chatbots like ChatGPT, an executive order by President Donald Trump gives the attorney general authority to sue states with consumer protection laws that stand in the way of the country’s “global AI dominance.” | 
  
• The head of the Federal Trade Commission came out as a strong proponent of contentious online age-verification rules, arguing “it offers a way to unleash American innovation without compromising the health and well-being of America’s most important resource: its children.” | 

A North Carolina woman faces criminal charges after she allegedly kicked a pregnant school resource officer in the stomach while refusing to leave her child’s elementary school. | 

‘It’s evil’: The National Institutes of Health failed to protect genetic data of more than 20,000 U.S. children from misuse by a fringe group of researchers who used the records to claim intellectual superiority of white people over other races. | 

Two Florida teenagers accused of plotting to kill a classmate will be charged as adults with attempted premeditated murder. | 

ICYMI @The74

Emotional Support

91ɬ��’s Eamonn Fitzmaurice and his son Ellis  to offer a few treats and scratches. “I’m a dog person,” Eamonn tells me, “but the cats were cute.”

Nearly half of those surveyed reported leaving their jobs to provide child care, 80% experienced food insecurity and just over half worried that their child was missing out on care that is safer or more welcoming. This was especially true for kids with disabilities.

The research is particularly relevant given the federal government’s recent attempt to freeze $10 billion in social service funds to five Democratic-led states, including at least $2.4 billion in child care subsidy funding.

Daphna Bassok, the report’s author and an education and public policy professor at the University of Virginia, said if the funding to the five states were to disappear overnight, the impacts would be “pretty dire” and quickly felt.

“The findings highlighted just how meaningful these resources are for families. This is not help around the edges or help just to make things a little better,” she said. “The results suggest they are driving families’ abilities to work and go to school and do basic things, as well as children’s ability to go to child care centers.”

On Jan. 6, the Department of Health and Human Services announced it was halting billions in child care and family assistance funds to California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota and New York, alleging “serious concerns about widespread fraud and misuse of taxpayer dollars in state-administered programs.”

Within days, the attorneys general for all five states claiming the move was “cruel,” unconstitutional and would lead to immediate and devastating impacts. A federal judge has since issued two , halting the freeze through Feb. 6. 

Three key programs serving particularly vulnerable children and their families hang in the balance: the Child Care and Development Fund ($2.4 billion), the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ($7.35 billion) and the Social Services Block Grant ($869 million).

The Child Care and Development Fund is the main federal grant program allowing states to assist low-income working families with child care, and even before the attempted freeze the need was greater than what the dollars were able to support, according to Julie Kashen, the director of Women’s Economic Justice at The Century Foundation. 

“It is a program that has long been starved,” she said.

The move by HHS to cut off funds to the five states followed a conservative YouTube personality alleging widespread fraud in child care centers in Minnesota. A from 2019 did find significant weaknesses in anti-fraud controls, vulnerabilities that were addressed by and . Separate and highly publicized instances of substantial fraud in a Minnesota child nutrition program during the pandemic have since led to dozens of . The more recent allegations made via viral video have so far proven to be

Some 12.5 million children are eligible for the subsidies based on federal guidelines, yet only about 2 million received them in 2019, covering just 16%, according to a 2023 Between July 2024 and May 2025 in Virginia alone, almost 19,000 families who applied for a subsidy were placed on a waitlist.

Brookings researchers collaborated with the Virginia Department of Education to survey these families. They received responses from 6,548 (35%) of them between August and September of 2025, making it one of the largest studies to date looking at the experiences of eligible families missing out on subsidies. At the time of the survey, 67% of respondents were still awaiting the benefits, while 33% had made it off the waitlist and were receiving funds.

The vast majority of surveyed families still on the waitlist reported significant impacts to their employment as a result, with 76% saying they worked less than desired, 71% saying they turned down additional work or a promotion and 64% saying they reduced work or school hours to provide care. Nearly half had left their jobs altogether.

In open responses, parents described the financial bind they were in: each needed child care to work but, without subsidies, also needed work to afford child care.

“So many of these families felt trapped in this cycle,” said Bassok.

One parent wrote: “I feel like I can’t commit to any plans or ideas about the future months or year until I know if my daughter can go to daycare because we simply cannot afford the rates without subsidy.”

This challenging loop could be exacerbated if HHS is allowed to proceed: The Century Foundation has that if child care providers in the five states are forced to shutter because of withheld federal subsidies, it could impact more than 500,000 children, cost more than $400 million annually in lost parental earnings and could drive 156,000 moms of young children out of the workforce.

It’s not clear what will happen once the temporary halt lifts on Friday; the judge is currently considering a request for a temporary injunction, which would secure the funding while the underlying case is litigated.

For now, the families who eventually made it off the waitlist in Virginia are faring significantly better: nearly two-thirds reported they were able to increase work or school hours, start a new job, or accept a promotion or new position as a result. In all, those still awaiting funds were twice as likely to remain unemployed as those who received them, a difference Bassok described as “massive.”

Those still on the waitlist were also 11 percentage points more likely to experience food insecurity (80% vs. 69%); 15 percentage points more likely to frequently worry about running out of money before getting paid again (51% vs. 36%); nearly twice as likely to have bills that are often past due (31% vs. 18%); and 10 percentage points more likely to buy things with credit, hoping to have the funds later (25% vs. 15%). 

Half of families awaiting support said they were unable to find any care for their kids — including with relatives or friends — and the vast majority (69%) worried their children were missing out on care that could better support their learning and development. That percentage plummeted to 21% for the families that eventually made it off the waitlist.

These concerns were particularly pronounced for parents of kids with diagnosed or suspected learning disabilities and delays, according to Bassok, who described this as an “intense and common theme in the responses.”

Families were “really worrying about what the wait for a child care center was doing for their kids at a critical moment in their development,” she said.

“My son is turning 2 years old and is not yet talking or interacting with other children,” wrote one parent. “Without access to affordable, quality care, he is missing vital opportunities for socialization and early learning that could support his development.”

Another argued her daughter’s delays were a direct result of low-quality care: “She is just being ‘watched’ and not taught much. She doesn’t say many words and I have to put her in speech therapy. … I didn’t have enough money to pay for the day care center that teaches babies.”

These concerns extended to physical safety as well: parents struggling to afford care were less likely to rely on regulated child care centers and more likely to turn to options they didn’t trust.

“The wait for assistance has forced us to rely on unlicensed home daycares out of desperation,” wrote another parent, “which comes with safety concerns and constant instability.”

On the flip side, parents of kids with disabilities who did have access to the subsidy reported an ability to access high-quality care. One wrote, “[Receiving a subsidy] has meant that my son, who has high functioning autism, can attend a safe school where he can get incredible care and since starting there he has been thriving.”

Bassok argued that the Brookings report demonstrates a growing need for more of the exact resources the federal government is trying to strip away. 

“Aside from this moment of what’s happening nationally around these cuts,” she said, “the real takeaway is around needed expansions in federal and state dollars to meet these demands for kids.”

The U.S. Senate has until Friday night to approve a package of funding measures or else risk another government shutdown. That package includes funding for child care subsidies, Head Start, and other services for young kids.

Senate Democrats have said they oppose the spending measure because it also includes funding the Department of Homeland Security. They want new restrictions on immigration enforcement, and to split it off from the other funding bills in the package in the  by federal officers.

In addition to Head Start and child care, the bills in the six-part package include funding for infant and early childhood mental health, maternal health, and home-heating assistance,

“There is no reason that funding for children, for babies, for meeting their very basic needs should be contingent on whether or not ICE gets funding,” said Melissa Boteach, the chief policy officer at Zero to Three, an advocacy organization for babies and young kids. “[Young kids] are in the most rapid stage of brain development. They have immediate needs that need to be met.”

Head Start disruption: What could happen?

The last government shutdown in the fall lasted 43 days, and several Head Start programs in California . Boteach said there may be a few centers that are immediately affected, and others later on if a shutdown drags on, depending on when the center’s grant cycles starts.

Those most at risk are programs that have a Feb. 1 start date, said Melanee Cottrill, executive director of Head Start California, of which she estimated there are around 6-10.

Head Start is a federally-funded program that provides early education and other services to children in low-income families. “ For many of these children, these are also the most nutritious meals that they get every day [at Head Start],” Cottrill said.

“It’s not guaranteed that they’ll close their doors if there is a government shutdown. It really depends on whether they have other funding sources,” she added.

Federal funding for childcare subsidies for low-income children (which is administered through the state) is also part of the funding package. Earlier this month, President Trump said he would freeze that funding to California, though  has been tied up in court.

“There’s already been a good deal of instability in these programs and for families who rely on them and are just hopeful that the Congress can finish this off and, uh, be able to move forward,” said Donna Sneeringer, president of the Child Care Resource Center, which runs Head Starts and child care subsidy programs in the Los Angeles area.

“[Parents] feel very insecure — these temporary pauses… the family’s lives don’t pause,” said Mary Ignatius, who heads Parent Voices. “ Real harm happens to the child care providers, the families, and the children who cannot afford any delays.”

This article was originally published by .

Zjanice Carter was just a child in Seattle when her parents moved the family more than 2,000 miles to Kalamazoo, Michigan, all for a chance at free college for their six children.

“My parents always dreamed of having a big family,” said Carter, now 25 and a college graduate. “But as they realized that dream was really expensive, they began to game plan and pray about how (were) they going to afford to give us the life that they wanted us to have?”

Kalamazoo had what was then a rare program. Anonymous donors in 2005 created what they called the Kalamazoo Promise, a pledge to pay college tuition for any graduate of the Kalamazoo school district. Students would no longer worry about whether they could afford college or if they would graduate with thousands of dollars of debt.

“My parents packed their whole lives into the back of the van and just drove for 33 hours, the whole way, trusting that this community would keep its promise,” Carter recalled.

Kalamazoo did keep its promise — for all six Carter children, who each earned college degrees without tuition bills — along with about 9,000 graduates who have had college tuition bills paid since the program launched. A little more than half of those students who started college earned a certificate or degree.

The Kalamazoo Promise marked its 20th anniversary in November by pairing a celebratory banquet with a conference of researchers and advocates of similar “promise” programs across the country that Kalamazoo helped inspire.

In some cases, donors in communities rallied to raise private funds that would guarantee tuition payments for decades. In others, individual colleges, cities or states commit tax dollars to covering tuition.

The anniversary was also occasion to take stock of challenges that promise programs face as the Trump administration reshapes school laws and federal funding of schools, states and social service organizations.

“It’s an important time for the Promise movement,” said Michelle Miller-Adams, senior researcher at the W.E. Upjohn Institute and organizer of a panel on the federal changes. “We’re here celebrating two decades of innovation around place-based scholarships, as well as the many thousands of students served by Promise programs. At the same time, though, we need to attend to policy changes that could make the coming decade more difficult.”

She said “attacks” on the U.S. Department of Education, changes to student loan rules and accreditation, as well as potential threats to Pell grants students rely on are “altering the landscape of federal higher education policy and may challenge the foundation on which Promise programs are built.”

All of those factors could affect promise programs in different ways — in how well students are supported while they prepare for college, how much tax money is left for publicly-funded promise programs and how much money a promise program will need to cover tuition to keep their promise.

Ryan Fewlins-Bliss, executive director of the nonprofit Michigan College Access Network, told 91ɬ�� that navigating the political climate today is “scarier” than before.

“I think people are really worried about the existence of their organizations and their missions, and their fundraising, their donations…their federal funds,” he said.

There’s even concern that federal cuts to Medicaid will push health care costs to states, which will leave less money in state budgets to support state colleges and to support state promise programs.

 “We could again see declining college affordability as a result of state budget choices,” said Sameer Gadkaree, outgoing CEO of The Institute for College Access & Success.

Though it might be the best-known, Kalamazoo isn’t the first such “promise” program — the first came in the 1960s in Philomath, Oregon — but the city of 73,000 was key in drawing attention to a strategy to give students hope that if they finish high school, college was within reach.

In the 20 years since the Kalamazoo Promise was announced, similar programs have grown dramatically across the country, from just 10 in 2005 to more than 200 today, by one count, as cities like Pittsburgh, New Haven, CT, and El Dorado, AR, have started their own programs.

Several states also started statewide scholarship efforts, including California, Massachusetts, New York and Tennessee, while Michigan added promise programs in Detroit and other cities.

College Promise, a Washington, D.C., non-profit that advocates for the programs, reports an even greater growth when including other broad and inclusive scholarship programs — 53 such scholarships in 2015 to more than 450 today.

“Absolutely, we can trace many of the community-based programs to the Kalamazoo Promise modeling effect,” said Michelle Miller-Adams of the Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. “The Kalamazoo Promise got a ton of national publicity when it was first created, and that is part of the reason many other communities decided to give the model a try.”

Former President Barack Obama brought some of that attention when he at a city high school, telling students their chance to “chase your own dreams without incurring a mountain of debt” was an “incredible gift.” 

Since then, researchers have found that promise programs can improve college readiness, enrollment and completion, along with increasing property values modestly, as families like the Carters increase demand for houses. 

Because promise programs can differ greatly — most notably in the type of colleges they pay for or whether students must contribute their federal Pell Grants first — comparisons are rarely simple.

But researchers have shown:

• College promise programs lead to more students enrolling in college than before the programs started.
• The pandemic caused a break in that pattern, with fewer students everywhere enrolling in college than pre-pandemic. But students in promise programs are still enrolling in college more than in comparable cities.
• Students are to believe they will earn an associates degree or higher with help from a promise program, with disadvantaged racial groups sometimes expecting a 30-percentage-point gain.

“The adoption of a promise program had meaningful impacts on local high school students’expectations to ultimately attain an associate degree or higher,” University of Wisconsin-Madison Assistant Professor Taylor Odle reported in 2022.

Promise programs can also help cities. Though they don’t draw flocks of families looking to take advantage of them, multiple studies have shown they draw some. Communities tend to either lose fewer residents if the region is declining or gain some population — about 1.7 percent, — compared to similar communities.

Programs like Kalamazoo’s, that give students 10 years of scholarship eligibility, can also help students whose career path isn’t clear. Jacqueline Bell, a 2021 graduate of Kalamazoo Central High School, tried culinary and cosmetology programs at two separate colleges before deciding to pursue becoming a pastry chef at Kalamazoo Valley Community College.

“I would still be doing this, even without the promise,” Bell said. “This is just what I love to do. But having that promise definitely helped and kept me here … and in less debt. I’m very grateful that I don’t have to worry about that.”

At the same time, some question whether the programs truly help low-income students that most need it. Federal Pell Grants can typically cover community college tuition for the poorest students already, even if there is no promise program in place.

Promise programs also rarely cover room, board and transportation, costs students have to pay themselves while attending college full time. Since about 75 percent of promise programs cover tuition only after Pell Grants have been spent, students can’t use the grants to cover those costs. 

“Since most promise scholarships only cover tuition and fees, low-income students may not receive any money,” University of Georgia researcher Meredith Billings the Brookings Institution. “Instead, these programs tend to subsidize middle- or high-income students.”

Promise advocates also have additional concerns about low-income students and those of racial minorities. They worry that if federal grants to nonprofits that help these students are cut, students might not get the support they need before graduating from high school, leaving them less prepared for college. And philanthropies that would otherwise support a local promise program could shift money to cover gaps for those students from lost federal grants instead.

“The offices that supported them are going away,” said Fewins-Bliss. “The scholarships that supported them are going away. The people that supported them are going away. 

Those concerns are tempered, however, by what backers say is strong bipartisan support from states, who see appeal both in helping disadvantaged students find a path forward, but also as a way to build a more skilled and educated workforce to boost the state economy. Many promise programs have evolved so that connecting students to internships and jobs is as much a part of their mission as paying college tuition.

“You have students that are less likely to use social assistance,” John Barnshaw, senior leader of research and policy for College Promise told 91ɬ��. “You have students that are now more likely to have jobs full time and contribute to an educated workforce (and) higher tax base.”

Even within Kalamazoo and other urban areas, promise programs are constantly fighting to have families take school seriously and believe that college is right for their children. Kalamazoo Public Schools Superintendent Darrin Slade said his district had more than 50 percent of high school students chronically absent after the pandemic and there are still students who don’t take advantage of the scholarships, even just for trade school.

“We’re fighting old narratives, cultural biases, any number of things that will keep a student feeling that even though the opportunity is here and it’s the most universal offering that we could imagine, that they still think it’s not for them,” he said.

As Miller-Adams added, “It’s not enough just to understand the value of what’s on offer. People need to show up and see it through.”

Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly reported that a study found an increase in college degrees earned under college promise programs. The study covered increases in student beliefs that they would earn a degree, not degrees earned.

These moves raise significant concerns that the federal government won’t be able to meet its legal obligations to students with disabilities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ().

Education Secretary Linda McMahon has numerous times that federal special education funding will continue flowing, no matter where the office and programs land within the government. But what she has not acknowledged — and what is troubling — is how moving the program to an agency like HHS inevitably shifts the focus of special ed from education to health care, thus pathologizing disabled students.

This is especially true considering HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has made about children with autism, calling them tragic and doubting their ability to lead full and meaningful lives. His statements indicate a belief that a medical diagnosis absolutely leads to tragic outcomes — which is simply untrue. 

Framing students with disabilities solely in medical terms hinders their potential for growth by narrowly confining them to a diagnosis and perceived limitations — resulting in low expectations in school. As recently as the , this allowed most states to exclude disabled students from academic assessments. Many schools encouraged their parents to keep their children at home on testing days.

Since then, the country has steadily moved away from low expectations for students with disabilities. Under the Biden administration, the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services issued specifically focused on setting a high bar for these children. The guidance included a focus on inclusive education practices to ensure students with disabilities have access to high-quality education with the opportunity to meet challenging goals. It also offered details about how states and districts could leverage federal funding to achieve those ends. 

Inclusive education practices are flexible and creative. Using such an approach, a team determining appropriate classroom settings during an Individualized Education Program meeting might decide that instead of placing a student in need of behavioral support in a segregated class of peers with disabilities, the student could be put in a general-education classroom, assisted by a paraprofessional or special education teacher. operates this way. Teachers or paraprofessionals accompany students with disabilities to general-education classes, providing behavioral and academic support in real time, innovatively and effectively meeting a child’s unique education needs. Instead of limiting children with disabilities, guidance and practices like these help students look to an expansive future. 

But between moving special education to HHS and the longer-term to convert IDEA grants into formula block grants, it will fall to the states to ensure that their special education laws and regulations are robust. IDEA includes minimum requirements for supporting disabled students. States can and should do more, including developing their own laws and guidance on issues like inclusion, challenging academic standards, teacher and service provider support and training, and requirements to provide services in an equitable manner to all students.

Families and advocates can work to hold states and districts accountable by, for example, pushing for state-level disaggregated reporting on timely provision of services, restrictive class and school placements, and disproportionate disciplinary practices. Additionally, states must work toward timely resolutions of and for any violations of disabled students’ civil rights. 

Leaving schools without timely access to federal funding to provide legally mandated services means students will unnecessarily struggle, and their lack of progress will be used as an indication of the failures of the current program. There have already been that shifts of education programs to other federal agencies have tied up resources in even more layers of bureaucracy. 

Shifting responsibility for specific IDEA and special education programs to HHS means that when states come looking for guidance, the staff with deep understanding of the interplay among civil rights, disability and education will no longer be available to help them. What guidance they do receive could be limited and unsupportive of students’ true intellectual, cognitive or physical capabilities.

Burying special education deep in the can only make things more difficult for children with disabilities. Finding essential services that families are desperate to reach will be like looking for a needle in a haystack. 

Last year marked the 50th anniversary of IDEA. What should be a time for celebrating milestones in increasing inclusivity and accessibility in America’s public schools has instead been fraught with fear and fights to retain the unique supports provided to disabled children through the Department of Education. It doesn’t have to be this way, and it shouldn’t. 

Harold Hinds, is a civil rights attorney and Ph.D. student at the New School’s School for Public Engagement, also contributed to this essay.

It took  to stop the Uvalde, Texas, elementary school shooter after he killed 19 children and two teachers in 2022. 

Among the first officers to respond to what would become one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history was former campus cop Adrian Gonzalez. On Wednesday, after an emotional three-week trial, a jury found Gonzalez  Prosecutors had alleged the 52-year-old endangered children’s lives and abandoned his training when he failed to stop the 18-year-old gunman before entering Robb Elementary School and opening fire.

Big picture: It’s the second time ever that a school-based officer has faced criminal charges for their  as shots rang out inside a school. It’s also the second time the officer has walked free. 

In 2023, former school-based police officer  after he took cover outside a Parkland, Florida, high school as a gunman killed 17 people in a 2018 mass shooting.

Both cases raise the same question: Once a gunman enters a school and starts shooting indiscriminately at innocent people, 

Three for three? Gonzalez’s acquittal doesn’t mark the end of the criminal fallout from what the Justice Department determined were  Pete Arredondo, the school district’s former police chief, will stand trial on 10 child endangerment charges. A trial date for that case hasn’t yet been set.

In the news

Updates to Trump’s immigration crackdown: 

• As thousands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol agents descend on Minnesota, school communities have been pushed into chaos and fear, my Twin Cities-based colleague Beth Hawkins reports. | 
  
• The Columbia Heights school district announced that federal agents have detained four of its students over the last two weeks — including a 5-year-old boy who was used as “bait” as officers pursued his family members. The Department of Homeland Security said the elementary schooler had been “abandoned” by his father during a traffic stop. | , 
  
• The former Des Moines, Iowa, superintendent, who was arrested by federal immigration agents in September, has pleaded guilty to felony charges connected to lying about his citizenship status on school district employment forms and for possessing a gun while in the country illegally. | 
  
• Maine parents have stopped sending their kids to school as the state becomes the next immigration enforcement battleground. | 
  
• Immigrant-rights advocates have called for a Texas judge to recuse herself from a case involving an unaccompanied minor, alleging she demonstrated cruelty and bias including grilling immigrant children about whether they had “abandoned” their families in their birth countries. | 
  
• Worms and mold in the food: As the Trump administration restores the practice of family detentions, children in ICE custody are being exposed to unsanitary conditions and limited access to clean drinking water. | 

As Instagram and Facebook parent company Meta prepares for a trial over allegations it failed to protect children from sexual exploitation, the company has asked a judge to exclude from court proceedings references to research into social media’s effects on youth mental health.| 

Employees of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency inappropriately handled sensitive Social Security data, the Justice Department acknowledged in a court filing. The president of the American Federation of Teachers, which sued to halt DOGE’s access to such confidential information, said the revelation “confirms our worst fears” that the quasi-agency’s data practices jeopardized “American’s personal and financial security.” | 

Poor reception: Turns out, kids aren’t so hip to the idea of school cell phone bans. Fifty-one percent of teens said students should be allowed to use their devices during class. A resounding 73% oppose cell phone bans throughout the entire school day. | 

School districts across Michigan have rejected new school safety and mental health money from the state over objections to a new requirement that they waive legal privilege and submit to state investigations after mass school shootings. Some school leaders have argued the requirement creates legal uncertainties that outweigh the financial support. | 

As the Prince George’s County, Maryland, school district faces a “crisis budget” and braces for $150 million in cuts, officials plan to spend $6 million on artificial intelligence-enabled security technology, including weapons detection systems and license plate readers. | 

ICYMI @The74

Emotional Support

School (in)Security features all the news that’s fit to