TL;DR
Get gifts for the two of you delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
The Education Department began requiring federal grantees to provide written justifications with payment requests on Nov. 1, including for established programs such as Title I and special education. The rule follows major grant cancellations that disrupted services, prompting concern about added administrative work and possible payment delays; some states say they do not expect a significant burden.
The Education Department’s new requirement that federal grantees submit written explanations with payment requests took effect Nov. 1, adding a step to funding used for programs including Title I and special education. The rule, part of a government-wide policy, comes after the department cut nearly $170 million in community-school funding last December, renewing concerns among education advocates that changes to grant administration could interrupt services or delay payments.
Under the new process, grantees such as school districts, colleges and nonprofits must submit a written justification each time they request payment from a federal award. A department guide says an explanation may be limited to 255 characters, even for withdrawals as small as $75. The requirement applies across grant programs, not only competitive awards that the department has canceled or reconsidered.
The policy stems from a presidential executive order directing agencies to create systems that let officials pause and rapidly review payments. In a Sept. 28 memo, Murray Bessette, the department’s acting assistant secretary for planning, evaluation and policy development, wrote that officials could reject a payment justification outright in certain circumstances. The source report does not describe a specific payment rejected under the new rule.
State responses vary. A South Dakota Department of Education spokeswoman said the agency did not anticipate a significant burden or added staff time. Mississippi officials said they were preparing and would adjust if implementation required more resources, while Vermont officials said they planned to track the effect on workload. The department has not provided a quantified estimate of how many explanations it will process.
How Payment Reviews Could Affect Schools
Federal grants help pay for high-poverty school services, special education and other programs that districts plan and staff in advance. If a payment request takes longer to review, a district may have to use its own money temporarily, postpone services or adjust staffing. Those outcomes are concerns raised by advocates, not confirmed effects of the new rule so far.
The requirement may also add substantial administrative work if it applies to the large volume of transactions described by education advocates. The Education Department has said it wants to reduce unnecessary compliance burdens on states, while this rule adds documentation to requests for federal payments. Whether the process improves oversight without slowing funding will depend in part on the volume of requests and the department’s capacity to review them.
The consequences of abrupt funding changes are already visible in the earlier community-school cuts. Susan Stanton, who led an Illinois nonprofit administering two grants for 19,000 students across 32 schools, said the cuts led to lost services and staff. Her organization is seeking the remaining funds it expected under its grants. That episode informs current concerns, but it does not establish that the new payment rule will produce similar cancellations.
Popular right now
Ninja Luxe Café Premier 3-in-1 Espresso Machine, Drip Coffee Maker, and Cold Brew Maker
KitchenAid Artisan 5-Quart Tilt-Head Stand Mixer, Almond Cream
KitchenAid Commercial 8-Quart Bowl-Lift Stand Mixer, White
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
From Community-School Cuts to New Rules
Last December, the department ended nearly $170 million in community-school funding across 12 states, saying the program was no longer in the federal government’s best interest. Schools and providers responded by ending or reducing afterschool programs, tutoring, job training and other services, and laying off staff or canceling contracts. Stanton’s organization expected $70 million over three years and is still pursuing the money in federal court.
The report places the payment requirement within a wider shift toward tighter federal control over grant spending. The administration has rescinded funds Congress appropriated and redirected grants toward charter schools, while the department has also offered some states waivers from federal requirements. Last year, the department delayed telling states their Title I allocations for the 2025-26 school year; the report says that this year states received funding information on time. These events are distinct from the new payment rule, but contribute to concerns about predictability.
“We have never been able to recover from that level of instability.”
— Susan Stanton, executive director of Afterschool for Children and Teens Now Coalition
Workload and Payment Effects Still Unknown
It is not yet clear how many payment explanations the department and state agencies will need to review, how quickly those reviews will be completed, or whether requests will be rejected or delayed under the new process. The report offers no measured estimate of the rule’s effect on school-district workloads or the timing of grant payments.
The department’s staffing has fallen to roughly half the level it had when Secretary Linda McMahon took office, according to the report, but it does not provide a specific staffing count or show how many employees will handle these reviews. State agencies have also not yet reported a common assessment: South Dakota expects little added burden, while Mississippi and Vermont plan to monitor implementation. It remains unclear whether the earlier grant cancellations and the new payment documentation requirement will lead to further interruptions in school services.
States Begin Tracking Implementation
State education agencies are beginning to implement the requirement and assess how much staff time it takes. Mississippi officials said they would make adjustments if the process demands more time or resources, and Vermont plans to track the added workload. Those assessments may provide the first concrete evidence of how the rule is operating for grantees.
Congressional oversight could also increase. Maureen Tracey-Mooney, a former Biden administration official now at Georgetown University’s FutureEd, said she expects more scrutiny and said future appropriations measures or committee reports could give agencies more explicit directions about how funds should be spent. The source report does not identify a specific bill, hearing or timetable for that oversight.
Key Questions
What changed for federal education grantees?
Beginning Nov. 1, grantees must submit written justifications with payment requests. The requirement applies to a range of federal programs, including Title I and special education funding.
Does the rule apply only to new or disputed grants?
No. The report says the requirement applies broadly, including to major ongoing programs such as Title I and special education, as well as competitive grants.
Have school payments already been delayed under the new rule?
The report does not establish that the new requirement has caused payment delays. Advocates warn delays could occur if requests build up faster than staff can review them.
Why are education groups concerned?
They say the additional documentation could increase administrative work and potentially slow funds districts use for school services. Their concerns come amid earlier grant cancellations that led some providers to cut programs and staff.
What happens next?
State agencies are beginning implementation and tracking the workload. Congress may increase oversight, but the report identifies no set date for a hearing or a change to the rule.
Source: the74million.org
