When the Trump Administration announced its decision to terminate $600 million in federal education funding in February, it claimed that the funds were being used to train teachers on “divisive ideologies” such as “diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI)” and “anti-racism.” But educators say that the programs jeopardized by these funding cuts have for years served as the backbone of teacher preparation, professional development, and diversity recruitment in public schools.
“We should be doing more—not less—to make education a welcoming, supportive, and feasible career,” says Paul Lemle, president of the Maryland State Education Association (MSEA), the state’s teachers union. “Federal actions are going in the wrong direction and will make the educator shortage worse.”
Research has shown that having a more diverse teaching workforce, particularly more Black teachers, can lead to improved academic, social-emotional, and behavioral outcomes for all students. These factors have especially significant benefits for Black students, including higher graduation rates and increased college aspirations.
In Massachusetts, the abrupt cancellation of federal grants has disrupted multiple prominent teacher residency pipelines. The University of Massachusetts Amherst’s “Para to Teacher Program,” which aimed to train paraprofessionals to become licensed early childhood educators in Springfield and Holyoke, lost a $2.3 million grant, while the Boston Public Schools’ partnership with the University of Massachusetts Boston to train bilingual educators lost a $5.9 million grant. Both programs were designed to address critical workforce shortages and diversify the educator pipeline.
In California, school districts are scrambling to assess which culturally responsive training programs can survive following the Trump Administration’s directive to eliminate federal funding for DEI initiatives. In San Diego County alone, districts lost nearly $1 million after the administration revoked a $10 million Teacher Quality Partnership (TQP) grant that had supported the recruitment and training of diverse educators in high-need schools.
In more rural states like Mississippi and Arizona, school districts that relied on TQP funds are laying off staff and scaling back their educator preparation tracks.
These developments are part of the Trump Administration’s sweeping 600 million cut to federal support for teacher training and DEI-aligned initiatives—most notably the elimination of TQP and Supporting Effective Educator Development (SEED) grants. These programs have long supported partnerships between school districts and higher education institutions to train and place teachers in hard-to-staff schools.
The Trump Administration’s earlier memo, which barred federally funded programs from prioritizing DEI components, has since prompted lawsuits from multiple organizations, including the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE) and the National Center for Teacher Residencies. Critics argue that the policy not only undermines long-standing civil rights protections but also directly threatens teacher preparation pipelines serving historically underserved communities.
“These policies create exceptional challenges for our work, especially as we’re trying to inspire new educators to join the field,” says Lemle. “We want to build up the workforce and inspire new educators to join our ranks. These federal rollbacks make that harder.”
While the legal battles play out nationally, few states have become as central to this story as Maryland.
Maryland’s attorney general is one of nineteen that have filed suit against the United States Department of Education, and is home to an extensive infrastructure of teacher preparation programs, community school investments, and equity-centered reforms that now hang in the balance.
Lemle tells The Progressive that although MSEA isn’t directly involved in the lawsuits, the union is deeply concerned about the chilling effect the administration’s guidance will have on professional development and school culture. “It would roll back decades of progress for civil rights and respect for marginalized people,” he says.
In Prince George’s County Public Schools (PGCPS), one of Maryland’s largest and most diverse districts, Board of Education member Phelton Moss says the cuts have already begun to affect the district’s budget and ability to plan for the future.
“We’re in the middle of our budget cycle and already had to file an appeal [of] over $20 million in jeopardized federal funds,” Moss explains. “These were dollars we’d already committed through contracts. Now we’re looking at tapping into our fund balance just to cover invoices.”
Moss says PGCPS has formed a federal funding task force to keep up with changes in federal funding and the team is monitoring the cuts closely. But he emphasizes that the long-term impact may be felt more acutely in teacher pipelines than balance sheets.
“These programs weren’t just dollars; they were about capacity,” he says. “We benefited from TQP funding to strengthen partnerships with local universities and train new teachers in shortage areas like math and science. Without that, our pipeline suffers.”
Teacher diversity efforts—many of which were supported by now-defunded TQP grants—are among the most vulnerable. As of early 2025, over two-thirds of federally funded teacher residency programs with a stated focus on diversity have either frozen recruitment or reported scaling back operations, according to AACTE. Both Moss and Lemle say that without immediate intervention, gains in teacher diversity may be reversed in many districts.
“The Trump Administration made it clear that one reason for cutting TQP was its focus on diversifying the educator workforce,” Moss says. “That directly affects our ability to grow our Black teacher population, especially Black male teachers, who are already underrepresented.”
PGCPS has invested in such efforts for years, including partnerships with historically Black colleges and universities and residency programs focused on culturally responsive training. Many of these initiatives are now at risk.
“The administration’s policies attempt to erode support for aspiring educators and cut off inclusive, safe, and welcoming environments for our students,” Lemle says. “Those impacts will be felt in all schools, no matter the zip code.”
Despite these setbacks, Maryland’s leaders say one reason the state is better positioned than others to resist the administration’s cuts is the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, a sweeping education reform law passed by the state legislature in 2021. The legislation increases educator pay, funds universal pre-K, and includes weighted funding formulas for students living in poverty, English language learners, and students with disabilities.
“This is the perfect time for states to double down on investments [in education],” Moss says. “Maryland’s funding formula isn’t perfect, but it’s a national model—one that doesn’t rely on property taxes to dictate student opportunity.”
Lemle expresses a similar sentiment. “We’ve raised starting salaries to a statewide floor of $60,000, created Grow Your Own programs for support staff to become teachers, and expanded professional support,” he says. “That work must continue, no matter what comes out of D.C.”
But both leaders caution that the Blueprint alone can’t replace the scale of lost federal investment.
“About 10 percent of district budgets come from the federal government,” Moss explains. “We need federal, state, and local leaders rowing in the same direction.”
As the national lawsuits advance and schools prepare for the 2025-26 academic year with greater uncertainty, education advocates are urging communities not to stay on the sidelines. Some are calling on state lawmakers to expand protections for equity-focused programs through local legislation, while others are encouraging parents, educators, and school board members to speak out publicly about how the federal cuts are affecting their schools. Both Lemle and Moss emphasized the importance of sustained pressure, not only in courtrooms, but also in budget meetings, boardrooms, and ballot boxes.
“Our most vulnerable students—Title I students, English learners, students with disabilities—are the ones who will suffer if these cuts go through,” Moss says. “We’re not just talking about abstract programs. We’re talking about their access to the American dream.”
As legal battles continue and educators prepare for difficult budget decisions, Moss says the moment calls for more than just stopgap fixes. It demands a fundamental rethinking of how public education is funded and who we are willing to show up for. Without federal support, he warns, the students most in need of resources will be the first to lose access to opportunity.
“What is at stake is our most vulnerable populations, including our students with disabilities and students who rest in Title I schools,” Moss says. “They stand to not get the support they need to have the same fighting chance. The most vulnerable students in this country are at risk of not having a shot at the American dream.”
For Moss, that makes the funding debate about more than policy—it’s about priorities. “This isn’t just a budget issue,” he adds. “It’s a moral issue.”