AGB Policy Alert: Implications of the Executive Order on the U.S. Department of Education for Governing Boards

The recent Executive Order proposing the dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education raises significant concerns for higher education governance. While an outright closure of the agency remains unlikely due to the need for congressional approval, significant budget and personnel reductions will undermine its effectiveness and raise operational challenges that will impact institutions and the students that they serve. Administration leaders have pledged to diminish the agency’s programs and functions, even if that is short of outright closure, which will complicate institutional compliance and functions. College and university presidents along with governing boards together must stay vigilant, foster collaboration, and develop strategic and operational plans to safeguard the continuity of institutional operations.

Key Implications for Governing Boards

1. Regulatory and Compliance Uncertainty—The Department of Education provides federal oversight on accreditation, financial aid, civil rights protections, and research funding. With an operationally challenged federal body, institutions might face a fragmented regulatory landscape, requiring additional institutional resources for compliance.
2. Financial Aid and Institutional Funding Risks—Federal financial aid programs administered by the Department, such as Pell Grants and student loans, play a critical role in student access and institutional financial stability. Without a fully functioning Department, disruptions in funding mechanisms are likely to impact student enrollment and institutional revenue streams.
3. Accreditation and Quality Assurance—Federal coordination with accreditation agencies ensures uniform academic standards and institutional integrity. A weakened or operationally challenged Department might lead to inconsistencies, affecting institutional reputation and the global recognition of U.S. degrees.
4. Student Protections and Institutional Accountability —Title IX enforcement, student loan oversight, and protections against predatory practices are all at risk if federal oversight is diminished. This also comes at a time when the Department is enforcing different interpretations of compliance with Title IX and the consideration of race at institutions compared to the last Administration. Institutions must proactively develop internal policies to uphold student rights and maintain accountability in the absence of strong federal enforcement mechanisms.
5. Impact on International Student Recruitment and Retention —Uncertainty in the quality and consistency of U.S. higher education, combined with increasing visa denials and restrictions on international students, will hinder U.S. institutions’ ability to attract global talent. This loss not only impacts institutional revenue but also weakens the U.S. economy and workforce development, as international students contribute significantly to innovation, research, and economic growth.
6. Threats to Research Funding and Institutional Research Capacity—Federal agencies provide critical funding for research that drives public good and innovation. Without these resources, institutions are likely to struggle to hire essential research staff—graduate assistants, lab technicians, and senior researchers—and to continue vitally important ongoing research. This has the potential to undermine research initiatives and reduce the U.S. global leadership in scientific discovery and technological advancement.

Strategic Considerations for Governing Boards

Despite this announcement and its likely impact, higher education leaders must recognize this as an opportunity to reaffirm why the United States remains the world leader in higher education—through its distinction in academic excellence, access, research, and opportunity for social mobility.

The implications of this policy shift require an institutional governance approach that is more agile, transparent, and collaborative, mirroring the adaptability seen during the COVID-19 pandemic. Presidents and boards must work together to assess risks, communicate openly with stakeholders, and prepare contingency plans for institutional stability.

Questions for Governing Boards to Consider

• If the Education Department operations are diminished, impacting access to federal funding, financial aid, and research grants, how does this affect our institution?
• What steps must we take to maintain compliance with accreditation and regulatory standards with a Department that is both diminished operationally but also seeking to be aggressive in enforcement on Title IX and Title VI issues?
• How can we strengthen institutional policies to protect students and uphold our mission and values in anticipation of diminished and different federal oversight?
• What proactive strategies can we implement to safeguard the recruitment and retention of international students and faculty?
• What strategies should we adopt to maintain public trust and institutional credibility with a diminished Department?
• How should we restructure our governance practices to ensure continuous monitoring and strategic planning in response to evolving policy changes?

Call to Action

Governing boards should engage in frequent dialogue with institutional leaders and policymakers to anticipate and mitigate risks. The potential dismantling of the Department of Education is not just a regulatory shift—it represents a fundamental challenge to the stability, accountability, and global standing of U.S. higher education. To navigate these challenges successfully, institutions must embrace proactive governance, bold and timely leadership, and collaborative advocacy for policies that support student success, institutional sustainability, research excellence, and national competitiveness.