WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Education is set to undertake significant staff reductions, cutting more than 1,300 employees as part of a strategic plan to shrink its workforce by 50%. This initiative aligns with President Donald Trump’s broader agenda to decentralize federal government operations.
Officials from the department revealed these layoffs on Tuesday, stirring concerns about the agency’s capability to maintain its standard functions. Prior to this, the Trump administration had already initiated a gradual staff reduction through incentives such as buyouts and by letting go of probationary employees. Following these latest reductions, the department’s workforce will be slashed to approximately half of its previous count of 4,100 employees.
The drastic downsizing is part of Trump’s larger blueprint to trim the size of the federal government. Similar job cuts are projected at various agencies, including the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Social Security Administration. Additionally, the department plans to terminate leases of several office buildings in cities such as New York, Boston, Chicago, and Cleveland.
Despite the cuts, department officials insist they will sustain essential operations, including the allocation of federal aid to schools, management of student loans, and supervision of Pell Grants. Education Secretary Linda McMahon stated that upon her arrival at the department, her goal was to streamline operations to redirect more funding to local education entities.
“A lot of our programs are outstanding, and it’s crucial that funding be directed to states,” McMahon remarked in an interview on Fox News. In a memo issued on March 3rd, the day her Senate confirmation took place, McMahon advised employees to prepare for significant reductions, highlighting the department’s mission to diminish bureaucratic excess and delegate authority to states.
On Tuesday, an email was dispatched to employees indicating that the department’s headquarters in Washington and its regional offices would close the following day, with access restricted until reopening on Thursday, citing only “security reasons.”
President Trump had previously campaigned on promises to eliminate the department, denouncing it as influenced by “radicals, zealots, and Marxists.” While Secretary McMahon acknowledged during her confirmation hearing that only Congress could abolish the department, she expressed that restructuring and budget cuts are warranted.
Concerns linger regarding potential impacts on American students, feared by Democrats and education advocates. Some worry that the administration’s focus might undermine the department’s core responsibilities, such as enforcing student disability rights and managing the $1.6 trillion in student loans.
McMahon assured lawmakers during her hearing that the objective is not to defund vital programs but to enhance their efficiency. Prior to these developments, the Department of Education was already one of the smallest Cabinet-level entities, consisting of 3,100 employees in Washington and an additional 1,100 in regional offices.
Department employees had been under increasing pressure to resign since Trump’s inauguration—initially through a deferred resignation plan and subsequently a $25,000 buyout offer, which expired on March 3rd.
Jeanne Allen of the Center for Education Reform, an advocate for charter school expansion, endorsed the staff reduction strategy as both necessary and beneficial. “Reducing federal intervention will empower state and local authorities to introduce innovative and flexible solutions for schools, tailored to student needs,” she advocated.
Meanwhile, some stakeholders remain skeptical of the department’s assurance that its operations will remain unaffected by the staffing cuts. “It’s hard to see how these reductions won’t impact service delivery,” remarked Roxanne Garza, a former chief of staff in the Office of Postsecondary Education. Now serving as director of higher education policy at Education Trust, Garza noted that many departmental functions are resource-intensive, like processing civil rights complaints and assisting families with financial aid applications. “I just don’t see how such tasks won’t be influenced by a reduced workforce.”
