The Trump administration, through Education Secretary Linda McMahon, has announced a controversial plan to “test” the efficiency of the U.S. Department of Education by transferring key programs and responsibilities to other federal agencies. McMahon framed these moves as experimental, aimed at evaluating whether core functions such as student loans, career grants, and education support services can be managed more effectively outside the department.
Among the most high-profile transfers is the movement of nearly $2.7 billion in career and workforce education grants to the Department of Labor. These funds, including programs supporting vocational training, adult literacy, and technical education, are intended to be administered by the Labor Department’s Employment and Training Administration. McMahon emphasized that this is not an immediate closure but rather a “test” of cross-agency efficiency.
In addition, the administration is exploring shifting the Department of Education’s $1.6 trillion student loan portfolio to the Small Business Administration. Under this plan, the SBA would handle loan servicing and collections, freeing the Education Department to focus on policy oversight rather than operational management. Nutrition and special-education programs are also slated to move to the Department of Health and Human Services, aiming to consolidate services for vulnerable populations.
McMahon insisted that Congress retains ultimate authority over the Department of Education. While these “tests” could lead to broader changes, any permanent closures or reassignments would require legislative approval. She argued that the transfers are designed to reduce duplication, increase operational efficiency, and improve service delivery to students and states alike.
However, critics have voiced serious concerns. Many lawmakers, educators, and civil-rights groups warn that transferring billions in funding and staff between agencies could disrupt services, particularly for low-income students and special-needs programs. Some fear this could be the first step toward dismantling the department entirely, undermining a federal institution that has long been central to American education policy. The rapid reorganization and significant staff reductions—nearly half of the department’s workforce—have heightened these worries.
Political analysts say McMahon’s framing of the changes as a “test” is a strategic move. It softens the narrative while signaling the administration’s broader agenda of shrinking federal agencies and consolidating programs. Yet the stakes are high: moving operational responsibilities without clear congressional approval could spark legal challenges and ignite partisan debates over accountability and oversight.
For students, educators, and policy experts, the developments highlight the tension between government efficiency and program stability. While the administration argues that cross-agency testing could streamline services and reduce bureaucracy, opponents emphasize that education programs serve millions of Americans and any disruption could have long-term consequences.
As the Trump administration continues these trials, the outcome will shape the future of federal education policy. Lawmakers, advocacy groups, and the public will be closely monitoring whether these tests enhance efficiency or inadvertently destabilize critical programs. The debate raises key questions about the role of the federal government in managing education and the balance between innovation and accountability in public service.
Watch video below :
