Breaking Down ED’s Interagency Agreements

Over the last year, Education Secretary Linda McMahon has taken what was once an obscure, technical term and turned it into common lingo among higher education leaders as she’s used 10 interagency agreements in unprecedented ways to advance President Trump’s goal of dismantling the Education Department.

Prior to Trump’s second term in office, the acronym “IAA” was sparsely used among college and university officials, with the exception of a few select policy experts. Those who did use the term largely saw the agreements as a positive way for various agencies to collaborate on projects and support students.

Now, McMahon is using IAAs to outsource responsibility for entire programs, raising concerns that she’s trying to bypass Congress and essentially dismantle the Education Department without lawmakers’ approval. McMahon maintains she can’t shut down the agency without congressional approval and has said the agreements are ways to show how the federal government can carry out the programs without ED.

Authorized by statutes like the Economy Act, IAAs have long served as written agreements that allow two or more agencies to share goods, services or staff and prevent duplicate efforts. Over the years, their use has become standard practice, so much so that there are government forms used to facilitate them.

But McMahon has defied previous standards, experts say. Under her IAAs, dozens of programs and responsibilities have moved to other federal agencies. While the other agencies administer the programs, ED maintains control over them. For example, the Labor Department is now overseeing TRIO and recently launched the first grant solicitation for one of the college access programs, but it was ED that released the competition notice and set the rules. All awards will be issued on the Labor Department’s platform.

IAAs were first thrust into the spotlight last June when court records showed that a handful of adult education programs, previously overseen by ED’s Office of Career Technical and Adult Education, were being transferred to the Department of Labor. Then, in November, McMahon announced six more agreements, this time transferring dozens of programs from several different offices within ED across four different departments—Health and Human Services, Interior, Labor, and State.

And most recently, on March 19, the education secretary announced what could be the first stage of her largest move yet. This time, ED plans to move the entire Office of Federal Student Aid—the department’s largest division, which oversees $1.7 trillion in loans and more than $22 billion in annual need-based scholarships—to the Department of Treasury. The transition would be broken down into three phases, starting with Treasury beginning to collect on defaulted loans, according to an ED fact sheet. (A few weeks prior, the Education Department also announced plans to transfer oversight of foreign gifts and contracts to the Department of State.)

Throughout the process, many higher ed policy experts, Democrats in Congress and advocacy groups have sounded the alarm. They warn that moving such long-standing programs will likely lead to operational kinks, preventing federal grant dollars from reaching the institutions they were intended for and complicating an already confusing student aid system.

“Despite all this administration’s talk about creating efficiency, the fact is these agreements simply create pointless new red tape—while threatening basic services and support that students depend on every day,” said Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat, in a statement after the IAA with the Treasury Department was announced.

In the face of such opposition, ED continues to defend the use of IAAs.

“While the opposition is protecting a system that produces dismal results for our students, the Trump administration demands better than the status quo,” ED press secretary Savannah Newhouse told Inside Higher Ed. “Our partnerships are a proof of concept to show how education programs can be better administered with partner agencies who bring a wealth of expertise and are better positioned to deliver results for students and taxpayers.”

The terms of each IAA differ, as do the affected programs and the timeline of the partnership. As the existing IAAs are implemented and new ones are announced—which the Trump administration has suggested will happen—here’s a breakdown of what they cover.