社区黑料

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 社区黑料 Newsletter

Two months after Donald Trump swore in Linda McMahon as secretary of education, she named 鈥渆vidence-based literacy鈥� as one of the . Yet the White House’s 2027 budget plan for some of America’s most vulnerable students 鈥� from programs that create the conditions for children to learn to read. 

You cannot claim to support literacy while slashing the very programs that help children become readers, stay healthy and succeed in school.

For more than two decades, I have worked alongside families as a social worker, nonprofit leader and education advocate. Today, I lead Families In Schools, a nonprofit that equips parents with the tools, knowledge and confidence to support their children鈥檚 learning. I have seen firsthand what happens when families have the support they need 鈥� and what happens when they do not.

The parents we work with remind me of my own parents. My father came to this country through the Bracero program and, like so many parents, trusted public schools to create opportunities for his children. I was the first in my family to graduate from college. That should not be the exception for children in communities like mine.

I benefited from programs that helped me succeed. Today, too many families risk losing those same opportunities.

The president鈥檚 Fiscal Year 2027 budget proposal would take 17 education programs that families rely on and roll them into a single block grant, cutting their funding from $6.47 billion to just $2 billion.

This is not reform. It is a dismantling.

Under this proposal, funding would no longer be dedicated to specific programs. Instead, states would receive significantly reduced amounts of money, with broad discretion over how it is spent. There would be no requirement to maintain investments in afterschool activities that keep children safe while parents work, college access programs like TRIO and Gear UP, community schools, family engagement efforts, academic supports and services for homeless children.

Programs like these aid more than 26 million students from low-income families. With reduced funding and no dedicated protections, they would be pitted against one another, and many would be at risk of disappearing altogether. But these programs are not extras; they are lifelines.

Families and educators know exactly what these cuts could mean.

They could mean parents working a second job scrambling to find somewhere safe for their child to go after school. They could mean English learners losing critical assistance in the classroom, or community schools having to cut back on health care, counseling, food assistance and other basic services that enable children to learn.

And they could mean family engagement 鈥� one of the most powerful drivers of student success 鈥� being pushed even further to the margins.

Parents are children鈥檚 first teachers and their most fierce and stalwart advocates. Literacy development begins at birth, in play and conversation with caregivers. Kids learn to love reading when people they love read to them. If they are struggling or falling behind, it鈥檚 usually the parents or caregivers who fight to make sure they get the help they need, whether that means demanding testing, changing schools or finding tutoring and afterschool activities. Children do not learn in a vacuum. They learn best when their families have the tools, information and resources to be active partners in their education.

The programs on the chopping block have been in place for decades, and they define 鈥渆vidence-based.鈥� They have been evaluated, showing improvements in attendance, academic outcomes and the ability of families to better support their children鈥檚 success.

Walking away from them puts that progress at risk.

States and local districts cannot absorb cuts of this . Families cannot simply make up the difference with time they do not have, money they cannot spare or resources that may not exist.

Parents, educators and policymakers all want children to read, succeed in school and build better futures for themselves. But literacy cannot just be a slogan, and literacy skills cannot be learned if children鈥檚 overall developmental needs are not met.

If children are truly to succeed, Congress should reject the president’s proposed cuts and protect the programs students and families rely on every day.

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 社区黑料鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.