Saving ED: Why the U.S. Department of Education is Essential for Students with Disabilities

Tim Villegas

Glenna Wright Gallo, welcome to the Think Inclusive podcast.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

Great. Thank you so much. I’m excited to be here with you today.

Tim Villegas

Glenna, why don’t we start off with a mood check? Typically, I record with someone, and then it’s weeks or months until it gets published. But this one is kind of a time-sensitive situation, and I just wanted to get your sense of the mood regarding the state of public education. Oh, that’s my dog.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

That’s funny. No, I locked mine downstairs so she wouldn’t interrupt us. You know, I’m very, very concerned. I recently spent 18 months at the Department of Ed in my previous role. Before that, I spent almost 20 years at two different state educational agencies, after working in classrooms and local school districts. So I feel like I really understand the system from all levels and value what the Federal Department of Ed brings to us. I’m quite concerned about anything that has to do with eradicating it, which I feel is pushing back against the premise and value of public education in our country. I take that very personally as someone who went through public ed, as a parent of two daughters who went through public ed, and for my future grandchildren. I value public ed so much that I’m concerned about anything that seeks to degrade the system we have. Let me be clear, I am not saying that public ed does not need to be improved. Any job I’ve ever had, I’ve talked about needing to improve the system in ways that we can do that. So I am not saying that it’s perfect and that we should maintain the status quo at all. But I think that when we start to tear down systems as our reaction to needing to make improvements, when we know what needs to be improved and choose not to do it, that’s an even bigger concern.

Tim Villegas

Yeah, and I do want to get to the guidance about inclusive practices that was published right before the new administration came on board. But let’s talk about that later. I want to set up this idea with a quick story. Recently, when the executive order came down to pause federal funding, I was at home at my desk, preparing our communications, social media, all that stuff. And I was like, “Oh, this seems big. This seems really big,” not just for our organization, but for hundreds and thousands of organizations across the country. That day was particularly difficult because everyone was trying to figure out what this meant for our future, for education, for IDEA funding. There were a lot of questions, and there still are. It was a difficult day. We had a family member at our house who typically isn’t there, and they asked me what happened. So I explained, and they had some interesting questions about why defunding the Department of Education is bad, what they actually do, and how it relates to my job. I think there is a lack of clarity and understanding about why the Department of Ed is essential, why it exists, and specifically for our audience, what kind of impact dismantling the Department of Ed would have on special education. So I’m wondering if we could do a basic Ed Department 101 type of thing. What role does the Department of Education play? How do they work together with IDEA?

Glenna Wright-Gallo

Perfect. Yeah, happy to do so. As I said, I’ve worked at all levels, so I think I have a unique understanding. State and local governments manage the day-to-day operations of public education, while the federal government supports through funding national programs to ensure consistency across states and policy recommendations. You hear a lot about state and local control of education, and we don’t want the Feds deciding standards. That’s a misunderstood concept because states control curriculum standards and teacher certification, while the feds offer financial assistance through congressionally appropriated funding. The federal government focuses on providing supplementary support and coordination, such as services to vulnerable populations like children with disabilities. State governments establish academic standards, determine graduation requirements, fund schools through local and state taxes, develop educational policies, and implement assessment systems to evaluate school performance and maintain quality of education. Consistency across states is important for students who move frequently, like military-connected children. The federal government allocates congressionally appropriated funds and monitors the implementation of IDEA, ensuring states and districts meet requirements and providing technical assistance and resources when needed. This dual system supports consistency and adequate implementation of IDEA without dictating specific actions within each state. The federal government also addresses national needs, such as the critical shortage of special ed personnel, by funding preparation programs. If federal support went away, we would see that shortage grow. Funds are allocated to states, districts, and nonprofits for evidence-based research, innovative ideas, technical assistance centers, and Parent Training and Information Centers. The federal government does not usurp the role and responsibility of states, but people often misunderstand this, thinking the feds set all requirements and dictate to the states, which is only true for legal requirements.

Tim Villegas

What would happen if all those functions of the Department of Ed moved somewhere else? The argument for those who are pro-getting rid of the Department of Education is that all of that stuff can still happen under another umbrella. What would be gained or lost if that actually happened?

Glenna Wright-Gallo

I’ve thought about that a lot. If we piecemeal responsibilities out to different departments like Labor or Health and Human Services, we fragmentize education responsibilities. The work done around IDEA, which is turning 50 this year, and the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act included additional protections for children with disabilities. The Americans with Disabilities Act and Title programs are also overseen by the department. Fragmenting these responsibilities would lead to a denigration of integration and separation from general education standards. Special ed is currently integrated within the general ed framework to ensure children with disabilities receive the same quality of education. Moving oversight to a different department could result in a disconnect from general ed standards, inconsistent educational experiences for students with disabilities, and a more siloed system. This could reverse progress made towards inclusive education and hinder social and academic progress and integration of children with disabilities. Moving special ed oversight outside of Ed could send the message that children with disabilities are not entitled to education. The federal government coordinates efforts and provides oversight, ensuring consistency and adequate implementation of IDEA. Fragmenting responsibilities could lead to gaps in services and support, impacting policy and funding. Ed plays a crucial role in implementing policies and providing funding for special ed programs. The process of disseminating congressionally appropriated funds involves public notification, input, and impartial expert review. Moving this process around or saying it doesn’t matter sets a disruptive precedent with long-term impacts on policy and funding. It could reduce the effectiveness of special ed programs and services. The inclusive practices guidance under the Biden-Harris administration in January 2025 coordinated efforts between OSERS and the Office of Elementary and Secondary Ed, which we haven’t seen historically. This coordination is crucial for effective implementation. One in four adults in the US has a disability, highlighting the significant impact dismantling the department could have on a large portion of the population. Removal of federal oversight and support could lead to a fragmented and less effective education system, negatively impacting the quality of life and opportunities for millions of people with disabilities. Ensuring everyone has the necessary support and resources for public education is key to our society.

Tim Villegas

Okay, let’s talk about oversight. Because I think there’s a misunderstanding of the functions of the Department of Education and how it relates to IDEA oversight. Help us understand what the current functions of oversight of the states and IDEA look like.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

One of the biggest aspects of oversight is monitoring. The department monitors the special ed programs of states, including Part C (early intervention for children birth through two) and Part B (ages three through 21). They look at legal requirements under IDEA, check if states are following them, and identify what is needed to get them into compliance. This involves looking at records, budgets, talking to families and local school districts, and analyzing data. They frequently identify things that were missed or misunderstood, especially with rapid changes in rules, laws, judicial decisions, and executive orders. Education also faces critical shortages and rapid staff turnover, leading to a lack of knowledge and understanding. Monitoring is not just about compliance but also about improving using resources funded by Congress. If a state is out of compliance, they must fix it quickly, generally within one year, and they must also fix it for the children affected.

Another big oversight function is the annual State Performance Plan (SPP) or Annual Performance Report, which includes 18 indicators, a mix of compliance and results indicators. It looks at whether states followed IDEA and if children are having improved outcomes. It requires states to focus on data, input from families, and dispute resolution. It’s about community feedback and working together to resolve disputes.

The third piece is customer service. Every state has people assigned to them in the department who help address issues, take calls from concerned constituents, answer questions from state and local education agencies or policymakers, and share information and resources. Millions of dollars go to technical assistance centers to help improve outcomes, compliance, dispute resolution, and parent training.

People also write to the department with concerns. I received emails and calls from family members, states, and legislatures asking for information and resources. We provide information to help people get more involved in their federal and local government.

Tim Villegas

There’s a level of expertise available for these things to happen. With the dissolvement of the Education Department, it’s possible families won’t have that expertise to reach out to for answers. Dear colleague letters and guidance to states on improving special education services would be given back to the states. In my opinion, and many others’, states don’t do a great job monitoring themselves.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

As a former state person who designed state monitoring, I’ll say this: It’s easy to think what you’re doing is right when you’re close to something and passionate about it. We all need to be held accountable and have public input. Different levels of systems and oversight create continuous improvement. Rapid turnover at state educational agencies means losing historical knowledge. When I was a state director of special ed, I was one for seven years in Utah and five years in Washington. I was one of the longest-standing state directors because they were losing them rapidly. Now, people stay one to three years, losing historical knowledge. The team at OSEP and OSERS, many of whom can retire within the next five years, have decades of commitment to serving children with disabilities. They understand the law and speak up on behalf of the populations they serve. Losing that historical knowledge would be detrimental to the children we serve.

Tim Villegas

Right.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

And again, I’m not saying it’s perfect. Anyone who’s worked with me knows I didn’t say it’s perfect. I always ask, how can we make this better?

Tim Villegas

That’s a great point. We recently had a webinar with a researcher, a professor from Ohio University, a journalist from The Independent, and our CEO, Carolyn Tien. We discussed changes and possible impacts. One message for those defending public education is that defending the institution doesn’t mean defending the status quo. We want to keep the institution and reform it to work better for everyone, but that doesn’t mean we don’t want things to change.

Tim Villegas

Absolutely.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

I want to discuss the impact of the current administration’s aggressive stance against Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Corporate America is scaling back on DEI, and organizations are scrubbing websites of related language. The executive order and the administration’s power affect things funded by federal money, including parts of public education and federal pass-through dollars to states. There’s confusion about what this aggressive rooting out of DEI initiatives means and the idea of rooting out radical indoctrination. The executive order is on the White House website. What impact might this attention to DEI have on programming for learners with disabilities? Our organization, MCIE, focuses on the inclusion of learners with disabilities and all students. There’s concern about how this might impact everyone doing the work of inclusion. What are your initial thoughts?

Glenna Wright-Gallo

Well, Tim, I have so many thoughts. When we talk about scaling back, we’re really talking about elimination. So, if we’re against diversity, equity, and inclusion, what does that mean? If we’re against diversity, we’re for segregation. If we’re against equity, we’re for inequity. If we’re against inclusion, we’re for exclusion. That doesn’t make sense to me with the morals I feel as a human being, our Constitution, our laws for public education, and IDEA. It becomes even more personal to me as a person with a disability and as a female. Does that mean I am less qualified by virtue of my birth? Does that mean that because I have a hearing impairment, I couldn’t possibly be qualified for the jobs I’ve had and that I’ve only gotten them because of this? That’s so belittling for so many Americans.

When we start weaponizing and eradicating DEI, we’re not talking about maintaining rights or improving education and learning. The conversation is about eliminating and removing, and as a parent and educator, that really scares me. Inclusive practices allow everybody access to learn and make progress. Exclusionary practices lead to increased discrimination and reduced opportunities. Special Education and Disability Advocates have historically been a grassroots movement, saying the status quo is not okay. Our children deserve access and the same opportunities. Federal oversight has been crucial in addressing inequities and ensuring children with disabilities receive the support and resources they need to be successful.

When we start removing things and weaponizing terms, we see an immediate negative impact. For example, we’ve seen reduced use and access to ASL interpreters in our news media. When the White House releases information, it’s not always accessible to the entire population. Using only certain sites to disseminate information excludes people. When we eliminate things and take concrete actions to remove access to certain groups, it feels like someone has made that choice for me, which is incredibly problematic. How do you feel about it, Tim?

Tim Villegas

A couple of years ago, there was a lot of talk around critical race theory and the anti-critical race theory movement. School board meetings were packed with people demanding action against anti-racist teachings and critical race theory indoctrination. I live in Georgia and work remotely for MCIE, which is in Maryland. I saw this happening up close. I did a podcast episode about what inclusion is and the CRT, anti-CRT movement. A principal from Maryland was moving to Georgia to be closer to family and took a position as the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion director in a local school district. The community became enraged that the district hired someone for this position, fearing she would bring in critical race theory. She ended up resigning before she even started because of the backlash.

This person was well-qualified and had the mindset and heart for the job. She was thinking about all learners and how to create inclusive schools. This is the kind of person we want in schools to develop inclusive, welcoming environments for all learners. But because of the attention on CRT, she took another career path. This creates ripple effects for people we want in schools to develop inclusive environments. They might decide not to work in public education.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

We already have shortages. We have long-term subs in thousands of classrooms across the United States because we don’t have available staff who are trained and want to go into this career. When we don’t have trained staff in classrooms, what’s the long-term impact on a child? There are critical stages of learning, and without providers, it will have a lifetime impact on our population. We’re arguing about things that may not be the right things to argue about. We all believe children should learn and in education. Public education is a large premise. How can we meet on the things we agree on and make improvements without dismantling the entire system? Our children can’t afford to wait. When I talk to leaders, I ask if their actions reflect their values. If improvements are needed, are you making those changes? If research shows something is more effective, are you switching? It’s not about maintaining the status quo because it’s comfortable. It’s about doing what’s best for the children we serve. That’s why we went into this field, right?

Tim Villegas

Right. We care about providing a good public education system for all learners.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

Every parent cares. Many people benefit from a robust and good public education system, no matter where you live in the United States. When we talk about change, we think about systems change. There’s a whole science around implementation and research on how to change systems. When new administrations come in and make changes quickly without input from stakeholders, it causes chaos and confusion. There’s a lot of trauma going on everywhere, not only in education but across the federal government. We know how to change systems effectively. If someone was really concerned about changing a system, they have the resources to do it. It makes me feel like maybe they don’t want to change the system; maybe they just want to break it. Any person observing what’s going on can see that things are breaking, not changing.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

I’m a bit of a Pollyanna. Sometimes we can be very arrogant, thinking we know the right thing to do without paying attention to what others have said. Systems are complex, but that doesn’t mean we don’t do things. We know what works. Research shows that children who are the most vulnerable need educators with the most content expertise. That’s not what happens in special ed in most systems. I’m not denigrating the work done by paraeducators, but research shows they need teachers with the most content expertise. Yet, we don’t make funding or staffing decisions in alignment with that research. It’s a combination of not knowing the research, not having time to look at it, worrying about funding, or facing opposition. We have to push back against opposing forces, but pushing back is the right work, not just destroying the system.

Tim Villegas

That’s a very non-partisan idea. The ability to push back against something you disagree with is what makes our country great. We have the freedom to push back.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

We have the structure, checks, and balances in place with the executive, judicial, and legislative systems. These layers support everyone and ensure checks and balances. Why are we abandoning them?

Tim Villegas

Exactly. Let’s get a little wonky about funding. There’s some misunderstanding about what it means when we talk about funding for IDEA. There are formula grants and discretionary grants. Help our listeners understand the difference between formula and discretionary grants and what each of those things do.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

Perfect. So, with the IDEA allocation from Congress, we see both formula and discretionary funds. The formula is based on statute in IDEA, which outlines how to calculate the amount of IDEA funding that goes directly to states. It’s a mixture of data, mostly historical data. One thing I always highlight when talking to families and communities is that states have to apply for these formula grants annually. They must make assurances that they’re meeting certain requirements and publicly post and hold hearings about their budget and how they will use the funds. A set amount goes to the state, which then flows directly to districts for special ed services. The state can use some funds for discretionary purposes, called state-level activities, which include required activities like monitoring and dispute resolution, and allowable activities like paperwork reduction, technical assistance, staff training, and transition activities. States must create a budget, post it publicly, and hold at least two public hearings before submitting it to the department for approval.

As a state director for 12 years across two states, I held many hearings, and less than 10 people ever attended or provided input. This is a tremendous missed opportunity. People either don’t know or don’t know how to engage. It’s not just about inviting people to the meeting; it’s about ensuring they can participate and have the necessary information.

The discretionary side of federal funding must be spent in specific ways dictated during congressional appropriations. For IDEA funds, this includes training personnel, technology use, data use, and administrative purposes. These funds come with directions from Congress, requiring public notice, comment, and response. Public comment does change things. Discretionary grants support critical education research, training of staff, and technology advancements. For example, the American Printing House for the Blind’s multi-line Braille reader and Bookshare were developed under these funds.

Tim Villegas

Right. Isn’t the described captioning media program also part of that?

Glenna Wright-Gallo

Yes, it is. There are so many projects funded this way. Early childhood is another example. Part C of IDEA is not an entitlement, unlike K-12 services. States don’t all prioritize or fund early intervention at the same levels, so these funds provide opportunities for our youngest learners in states that haven’t elected to fund those programs.

Tim Villegas

Yeah, that was a great overview. Thank you. You mentioned the lack of participation in hearings. I was talking with someone from early childhood at the Department of Ed, and the general sense was that communication is key. If there isn’t a significant investment in communication channels, how will people know? Robust communications are essential, but they’re expensive. If it’s not a priority, people won’t engage.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

I agree. There’s so much information available that it can be overwhelming. People don’t always have the time to think through the long-term impact unless it’s flagged for them. We need to provide information in a neutral manner that allows people to recognize its importance without steering them towards a decision. The slant given to information now removes some of that opportunity for neutral processing.

Tim Villegas

As a special ed person, not a communications major, I understand. I’m an accidental communications person. I want to wrap up our conversation. We’ve covered a lot of good information. Do you see any reason for hope? And what practical steps can educators take if they feel they need to do something?

Glenna Wright-Gallo

I do have hope. I’m incredibly worried and exercising my rights as a citizen to provide input. Education and services for children with disabilities have historically been bipartisan issues. The majority of Americans oppose plans to eliminate the US Department of Education and recognize that every child deserves public education and special ed services if eligible. Families, advocates, and grassroots organizations have played and will continue to play crucial roles in addressing the dismantling of protections for people with disabilities. They have been successful in adding protections and identifying gaps in services. The hope lies in our public and collective voice, speaking out for what is right and just.

As a special educator, I believe in upholding professional principles and advocating for the children we serve. We all know and love someone with a disability. It’s more important than ever to speak out. Technology makes it easy to contact representatives and voice our opinions. Now is not the time to be silent. We need to say what matters to us. This is bipartisan and not about political affiliation. It’s about what we want for our children, grandchildren, and communities. Education has always been under state and local control, but we need safeguards and oversight to address gaps in services.

Tim Villegas

Absolutely. Any practical steps for people who don’t want to stay silent?

Glenna Wright-Gallo

Contact your elected representatives at the congressional level. Voice what you believe in and what you’re asking them to do. Thank them when they do something you agree with and tell them when you disagree. Have conversations with friends, family, and neighbors about why things are important. We need to look, research, and have those conversations. Read comments and arguments from both sides to understand different perspectives. Remember that everyone’s experience with public education is different, but that doesn’t discount any of our experiences. We need to talk about successes and leverage them for improvement. Demand that decision-makers listen to others, ask hard questions, and look at data and research.

Tim Villegas

Thank you for that. I am hopeful, even in these uncertain times. People are speaking up and engaging. Let’s end on a fun note. I have a segment called a mystery question. I have a stack of cards, and I’ll pick one for us to answer together. Sound fun?

Glenna Wright-Gallo

Maybe I don’t know that I would use the word fun, but yes, I’m in.

Tim Villegas

It’s fun for me. All right, here we go. This is kind of a serious one, but let’s just go with it. What is the main thing that influences your decisions? You can take it seriously or not. What is the main thing that influences your decisions? However you want to answer.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

I would say, for me, I have a really strong sense of justice, like what is right and wrong, and that really plays into my decisions. I always take it back to, how does this impact a child? People hear me say that all the time. This isn’t about my feelings being hurt; this is about the life of a child. So, a sense of justice is huge for me, not to be eclipsed by data. The whole “in God we trust, all others must show data” is huge for me.

Tim Villegas

I’m glad you went there. I’m going to go a little bit of a different route. I’ve been realizing the power of storytelling. Stories are, in a sense, data—anecdotal data. We’re on a podcast, and I listen to podcasts a lot. I’m a podcaster who listens to podcasts, and I love narrative podcasts. Narrative podcasts are my favorite. The things that have really changed my mind about certain topics almost always come down to a story. Listening to someone tell their story makes me feel differently about a topic, and I’ve changed the way I interact or make decisions because of it. So, storytelling influences me. I didn’t know what I was going to say until you said what you said, so thank you for going first.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

I don’t want to answer a second question, but I’m curious about what other kinds of questions are in your deck of questions.

Tim Villegas

The most recent one I can think of was, what’s a book that you feel everyone needs to read? Or, what’s something that you are not afraid of that most people are? Those kinds of things. We could do a bonus question.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

No, no, I’m good. I was just curious.

Tim Villegas

Eventually, I’m going to run out of questions. I have a 12-year-old, and I told her she can create some cards.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

Oh, that would be interesting. If you said, “I have a mystery question, and my 12-year-old created this,” I would have been like, “Tell me more.”

Tim Villegas

Yes, yes. Well, you’ll have to come back on.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

Okay, anytime. You have made this relatively painless, and I hope it was helpful to you and your listeners.

Tim Villegas

Glenna Wright-Gallo, thank you so much for being on the Think Inclusive podcast. We really appreciate your time, thoughts, and energy.

Glenna Wright-Gallo

Thank you so much for having me. It’s been very enjoyable. I appreciate it. Thanks.