CNA Staff, Jan 21, 2025 / 06:00 am (CNA).
During his campaign for the presidency, President Donald Trump said in a video posted in October 2024 that he would close the U.S. Department of Education and send education “back to the states.” This would require an act of Congress. But as commentators and activists speculate on what the new Trump administration may bring, CNA took a closer look at how the Department of Education impacts Catholic education and what shuttering it might look like.
Though private education doesn’t receive government funding, private schools often work with the Department of Education to enable their students to receive benefits from the variety of taxpayer-funded programs the department offers.
Reestablished under President Jimmy Carter in 1978 to collect data, the Department of Education now manages funding for various programs for elementary and secondary students as well as federal student loans for higher education.
An estimated 10% of funding for public schools comes from the federal government, with the rest coming from state and local taxes.
The department’s two biggest programs for K–12 education are the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which is meant to ensure that students with special needs have a free public education, and the Title I program, which is designed to help educate children from low-income families.
For higher education, the department manages federal student loans as well as the Free Application for Student Aid (FAFSA) program. The federal student loan program currently has an outstanding balance of more than $1 trillion.
In addition, the department tracks data about education through programs such as the Nation’s Report Card and the Civil Rights Data Collection program.
The Department of Education — one of the smallest Cabinet-level departments in terms of employees — has a staff of more than 4,000 people and a discretionary budget of $80 billion for 2025.
The department’s role in Catholic education
The Department of Education plays a role in Catholic education by contributing funding to private-school students for various programs. While private K–8 schools don’t receive government funding, private-school students are eligible for several federal education programs following the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in 1965.
The department’s Office of Non-Public Education (ONPE) “is the liaison to the nonpublic school community including religious, independent, nonsectarian, and home schools,” spokesman for the Department of Education Jim Bradshaw told CNA.
“ONPE’s congressionally mandated mission is to foster maximum participation of nonpublic school students and teachers in federal education programs and initiatives,” Bradshaw explained.
“In general, the department does not regulate private elementary and secondary schools or home schools,” Bradshaw noted. “Government regulation of private and home schools is limited and, if any regulation is made, it is usually enacted at the state level.”
“The department’s interaction with nonpublic elementary and secondary schools, including Catholic schools, is primarily related to the participation of their students and teachers in federal education programs and initiatives,” Bradshaw continued.
“Catholic schools also actively participate in the National Center for Education Statistics surveys and the National Assessment of Educational Progress, also known as the Nation’s Report Card,” Bradshaw added. “Important to note: Catholic private schools do not receive any funding under these programs. Rather, their students and teachers receive services.”
Sister Dale McDonald, PBVM, vice president of public policy at the National Catholic Educational Association, noted that for various federal and state programs, “private schools participate differently from public schools.”
“Private schools have to follow what they call the ‘child benefit theory’ that only children in need get served,” McDonald explained.
Through a consultation process, private schools can request aid for various needs such as professional development or technological assistance or direct aid to kids with learning needs, McDonald noted.
Students have access to various government programs, but not all of them are implemented by the Department of Education. For instance, the Obama-era National School Lunch Program is run by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, while the early childhood education program Head Start is run by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
What dismantling the Department of Education could look like
Trump is not the first to call for the shuttering of the Department of Education. Closing it was a major goal of Ronald Reagan’s administration — a goal it ultimately backed down on due to lack of congressional support.
While closing it is not a new idea, it has become more popular amid school choice debates and criticism of the public school system. Sen. Mike Rounds, R- South Dakota, recently proposed a bill in November 2024 to dismantle the agency.
Jonathan Butcher, a senior research fellow for the Center for Education Policy at the Heritage Foundation, shared with CNA what reform of the department could look like on a practical level in his view.
Butcher, a proponent of dismantling the department, said there are many programs that would be better served if moved to other departments in the federal government.
“I think that the Department of Education is simply taking on roles and responsibilities that it’s not designed to do — nor is it best at doing these things,” he told CNA.
For instance, the U.S. Department of Education’s data collectors — the Institute for Education Science, the Nation’s Report Card, and the National Assessment of Educational Progress — could be run by the Census Bureau, Butcher proposed.
“They collect data already. In fact, they already release reports about student enrollment in states around the U.S.,” he said.
Butcher proposed that the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights be moved to the Department of Justice “for much the same reason.”
“The Department of Education’s main responsibilities — what it was built to do — is to facilitate the transfer of money from the treasury to districts and states,” Butcher said. “Civil rights is an urgent issue; it should be handled by an agency that is dedicated to doing that.”
“We don’t want to get rid of it just because we’re getting rid of the Department of Education,” he noted. “We just want to move it to a place where it’s more appropriate to operate.”
Shuttering the department would require an act of Congress, which currently has a narrow Republican majority.
Some legislators are hesitant to cut federal funding to public education, and others expressed concern that important programs would be cut.
Michael Petrilli, president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative education think tank, told the Wall Street Journal that he doesn’t anticipate large budget cuts.
“I don’t think you’ll see enormous cuts because that’s super unpopular,” Petrilli said.
Some argue that practically speaking, it’s not feasible to close the Department of Education.
Rick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute said the Trump administration may need to keep it open to fulfill other commitments.
“It strikes me that a lot of the other promises Trump made about holding campuses accountable, about responding to antisemitism, or the excesses of DEI, require using some of the machinery at the [education] department,” Hess told National Public Radio in November.
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) noted that the bishops are committed to education regardless of what happens with the Department of Education.
“We are aware of the various proposals and ideas being expressed by the [Trump administration] regarding education,” Chieko Noguchi, spokesperson for the USCCB, told CNA. “The USCCB remains committed to upholding the education mission of the Catholic Church that is carried out locally in our parishes and schools, and we will engage appropriately when policies are put forth by the officeholders.”
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
The Dept. of Education budget is $270 billion rather than the $80 billion of discretionary, once we consider federal student aid above primary and secondary education. https://usafacts.org/articles/what-does-the-department-of-education-do/
And, about the stated issue that the department might be needed to counter the excesses of DEI…this raises the question whether the department has been complicit in promoting DEI and woke ideology in the first place?
Of such matters, financial and ideological, the ingrained issue is systemic and not easily excised. To what extent, for example, have student loans served to both help applicant students, but also to float the rising cost of college education, partly to serve the layering of administrative functions (with corner offices!) rather than improving professor/student ratios and educational outcomes in the classroom?
So, what about measuring outcomes rather than only inputs? Somewhere in the university economics departments there might still be attention to the theory of “rent seeking,” whereby in this case the educational industry expands itself to absorb the new revenues available. What about the overall banking/educational complex?
Even more than accurate department numbers, what’s the overall system outside the silo U.S. Department of Education?
Here’s an experiment: Close down the Department of Education and examine what impact it has on students. It might even have a beneficial effect.
Seems to me that before the Carter Afmin there was NO Dept of Education and, untold billions of dollars later, students are no better educated. Why, most graduating from high school these days can only read at elementary school levels.