When the U.S. Department of Education abruptly ended grants from most minority services last week, it raised questions about the measures the department would take on hundreds of millions of dollars in those programs. The department provided an answer on Monday, announcing plans to repurpose funds from plans that are “not in the best interests of students and families” to bring about historic black colleges, tribal colleges, charter schools and civic education.
“The department has carefully reviewed our federal grants to ensure that taxpayers are not funding programs that are racially discriminatory, but programs that promote goodness and excellence in education,” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. “The Trump administration will use every tool available to meaningfully improve educational outcomes and ensure every American has a chance to succeed.”
The department promised to mentor the additional $495 million to HBCUS and the Tribal Academy, with the exception of funding already expected for fiscal year 2025, 48.4% and 109.3%, respectively. A total of HBCU plans to earn more than $1.34 billion in revenue, with Tribal Academy expected to receive $108 million in the current fiscal year, as of September 30. The department did not share more details on how funds were allocated to institutions.
This move meets the mixed reaction. Some HBCU advocates are celebrating a one-time influx to change the game rules of the agency’s cash standard. Others fear that the Trump administration’s measures at the expense of others have made the tension between them stir up joy for others.
Less than a week after the education department revoked the grant program for Hispanic service agencies and other MSIs, new funds were less than a week deemed they were “unconstitutional” because they asked the university to qualify for a certain percentage of students of a specific race or racial background. (HBCUS and Tribal Academy have no enrollment rates.) This blow to MSI grants and cuts to teachers’ preparation, talented and talented curriculum are paying for the department’s recent big careers The New York Times The report said some anonymous sources familiar with the department’s plans were cited.
Lodriguez Murray, vice president of public policy and government affairs for the United Black Academy Fund, representing private HBCU, said the funds are “nothing more than god” for institutions operating on a lean budget.
“Now, suddenly [HBCUs] “There are more things to do not only what brings you every year, but it can make an impact on your campus,” he said.
Murray said he was not bothered with the funding of the cut MSI program.
He claimed that many of these institutions are primarily white, tend to have higher endowments than HBCU and offer lower stakes to students who qualify for Pell. (Most admission-based MSIs must serve at least 50% of low-income students. HBCUS does not have such requirements, but tends to enroll at least 70% of Pell students.)
For his part, the Trump administration is “resourced to institutions that seem to need it the most, and institutions with a better record of leading students from underserved backgrounds and … has changed the economic perspectives of their lives,” Murray said. “That’s why we received the funds this morning without pause.”
Harry Williams, president and CEO of Thurgood Marshall College, representing Public HBCU, said he wanted to see other types of MSIS thriving, while he was excited about how new support could help HBCU students.
He said he was unaware of the Trump administration’s plan to remove millions of dollars from institutions. Although the TMCF regularly lobbies HBCU funds, “we’re frankly never advised the government on where the funds come from because that’s their decision on how they operate.”
He said he was “sensitive” to the challenges facing MSI, noting that the TMCF has three major black institutions among its members. The TMCF issued a statement last week to support them, when the department said it was ending the MSI Grant program, including the PBI.
“We do support MSIS and PBIS and all groups in this category and recognize the importance of having resources, but our main focus has been working with HBCUS,” he said.
Confronting MSIs
Marybeth Gasman, executive director of the Rutgers Minority Service Center, said HBCUS and the Tribal Academy deserve the money.
She said the agencies were “always underfunded” and that “the federal government should always consider ways to improve them, especially based on our country’s history of racism and inequality.”
But Gasman believes other types of MSI are worth these resources as well. She noted that many Hispanic service institutions are community colleges, serving about one-third of the nation’s students, not just Latino students.
She said that despite years of efforts toward similar policy goals by MSI leaders and advocacy groups, the education sector “trying to challenge different types of minority services to each other.” “That’s really very disturbing…I hope people don’t fall for it.”
Gasman noted that department officials made a “purposeful” decision to share new funding from HBCUS and the Tribal Academy from programs already provided. She called the announced framework “malice” and said she was concerned about the future of the MSI community.
“All of these institutions have enough pie,” she said. “It’s not that you need to feed others from one person.”
Dominique Baker, associate professor of education and public policy at the University of Delaware, said that funding for HBCUS and the Tribal Academy, while necessary, did not convince her of the best interests of the Trump administration.
Baker said the funds were the government claims that “they are not racist because they look at all the money they give HBCUS,” Baker said, and they are not racist when they undermine the major white institutions of diversity, equity and inclusion. ”
“You are providing funding to institutions that deserve funding and you are working to ensure that the institutions you have in high reputation have made efforts.”
Excessive administrative branches?
The legitimacy of the department’s actions (funds that have been put into practice for other programs) is also somewhat vague. Department officials said they rely on “existing flexibility in the discretionary grant program” to transfer the money.
Amanda Fuchs Miller, deputy deputy secretary of higher education program under the Biden administration, is now president of Seventh Street Strategy, a higher education consulting firm, legally entitled to “reprogram” funds in accounts under regulations.
But even if department officials comply with the law, she said the “intention” of reprogramming will never end programs authorized and continuously funded by Congress, such as the MSI program. The administration claims it has the right to declare anything unconstitutional is a “real problem”. So, in her case, the department stands out by eliminating the MSI program and cutting its funds to other institutions.
“The great HBCU and TCU will get more money, which is great,” Miller said. “These students will benefit from it. But it is not beneficial for anyone to take money from one group of students to help another group of students. We should help all students succeed and have these resources backwards.”
