The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has proposed revising its “Guidance for Federal Financial Assistance” to create a regulation that would significantly limit eligibility for federal funds. The proposal would bar funding to “serve a woke policy agenda,” for “unlawful DEI practices, various anti-American ideologies in American education,” 91 Fed. Reg. No. 103 at 32200, 32202 (May 29, 2026). Go to reference and other viewpoints deemed objectionable by this administration.
The Department of Education (ED) and Department of Labor (DOL), as well as other grant – making agencies (NSF, NIH, etc.) have joined OMB in issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking. Before this proposed regulation can come into effect, public comments may be submitted here no later than July 13, 2026. NEA calls on all of its members to comment on how these changes would affect you and your school or institution of higher education.
Political Decisions in Grant Making
This proposal would give political appointees greater influence over decisions about which schools, colleges, and community organizations receive federal funding.
In practice, this means that instead of funding decisions being driven primarily by long-standing program rules, peer-reviewed criteria, or district eligibility, more weight could be placed on the priorities set by the likes of Secretary McMahon through grant guidelines and scoring rubrics. (This rule is seeking to codify their attempts at canceling grants that didn't align with their priorities even though they were granted under a previous administration and appropriated by Congress, specifically those around DEI and LGBTQ+ issues).
For example, research on disparate health outcomes could be defunded because the administration does not support its premise that such disparities are not a priority.
Less Stability
This rule could create uncertainty for programs that students and educators rely on every day, including:
- efforts to recruit and train educators,
- school mental health services,
- literacy programs, and
- other critical supports.
At a time when federal education priorities are being actively reinterpreted, K-12 schools may find it harder to plan multi-year investments. They may hesitate to hire staff if continued funding depends on evolving administrative guidance/shifting funding priorities rather than stable program rules.
For example, programs to support first generation students studying to become educators could be defunded because they tend to benefit underrepresented students.
Uncertain Federal Funding Priorities
The proposal will create a chilling effect on schools, colleges and educators by making them guess whether changing political priorities could jeopardize funding.
District leaders may become more cautious about applying for new federal grants or scaling successful pilot programs if they are unsure whether the same initiative will still be supported under future funding cycles.
For example, programs that support students' mental health may be unsustainable without federal funds if the administration determines that those programs benefit underrepresented students.
In Summary
Educators need stability so they can focus on teaching and supporting students, NOT navigating politically motivated requirements. Students deserve stable access to the programs and services that help them learn and thrive.
Federal funding should serve students, not politics.
Share how federal funding supports your students, school, campus, or community and why stable funding matters to you. Urge OMB to withdraw this proposal and preserve a fair, transparent, and student-centered grant system. Public comments may be submitted here no later than July 13, 2026.
Join Our Movement
