Vermont education officials say core K‑12 funding likely safe for 2025–26 but warn of larger risks later

At a joint hearing of the Vermont Senate and House education committees on March 13, Anne Bordenaro, director of Federal and Education Support Programs at the Vermont Agency of Education, told lawmakers the state does not expect major cuts to core K‑12 formula programs for the 2025–26 school year but that uncertainty for fiscal 2026 and later remains high.

"We are not anticipating significant cuts in FY '25 that would impact any of our major formula programs," Bordenaro said, noting that because education programs are forward funded Vermont is still operating on FY‑24 appropriations and expects initial FY‑25 allocations in July and October 2025.

The nut graf: Bordenaro framed two timelines for local schools. If Congress and the administration approve a continuing resolution or pass FY‑25 appropriations that mirror FY‑24 levels, Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) programs, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) funding and Perkins career and technical education dollars would roll forward. But proposed federal budget changes, executive orders and reductions in other federal safety‑net programs could indirectly reduce school resources for school year 2026–27.

Most immediate: a continuing resolution passed by the U.S. House would hold spending at FY‑24 levels and, if the Senate follows, would keep K‑12 formula funding stable for the coming school year. Bordenaro said the agency has procedures—such as preliminary allocations (for example, providing a portion of anticipated funds to local education agencies while final spreadsheets are pending)—to manage delayed federal allocations.

Bordenaro summarized other near‑term risks and federal actions. Department of Education staffing reductions and office closures have reduced capacity in national offices, she said, but the program offices Vermont works with for K‑12 (Office of Special Education Programs, Office of Career and Technical Education, and the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education) remained communicative at the time of the hearing. "Ed is supposed to be issuing guidance in the next day or so regarding all of this and who's in and who's out and who to talk to about different issues and all," she said.

She also discussed two recent federal civil‑rights communications that have alarmed educators: a Dear Colleague communication on Title IX enforcement and a related FAQ about diversity, equity and inclusion and Title VI. Bordenaro said the Dear Colleague letter indicates the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) will pursue enforcement using the 2020 Title IX regulations rather than the 2024 regulations vacated by the courts. She explained the practical difference is the 2020 definition of sex used for investigations, noting that "discrimination based on gender does not include gender identity or sexual orientation" under those earlier regulations.

On the Title VI/DEI FAQ, Bordenaro said the documents outline the types of curricular or policy matters OCR might examine and describe investigatory steps, due‑process protections and criteria OCR may weigh when reviewing complaints. She noted OCR also introduced a simplified online complaint form, which makes filing easier but does not change the legal standards for investigations. "It's not like if a parent made a complaint, you instantly lose your federal dollars," she said.

Bordenaro urged educators to continue planned professional development and instruction in line with local priorities and state rules, and to consult LEA legal counsel when questions arise. She said Vermont and 13 other state attorneys general released joint guidance intended to reduce fear about the new federal materials.

Funding specifics given at the hearing: the state’s total ESEA allocation was reported as about $68.5 million for the current year, of which Title I was roughly $42.7 million; IDEA funding was described as roughly $37 million; Perkins career and technical education funds were reported at about $5.9 million. Bordenaro said child nutrition reimbursements are set by statute and that schools should continue serving meals; the Agency advised LEAs to submit reimbursement claims promptly to avoid processing delays should a shutdown limit federal staff availability.

Bordenaro also described a now‑eliminated USDA local foods grant that had awarded Vermont about $1.2 million in the prior competition, with nearly $1 million intended for schools and roughly $277,000 for preschools and food banks; she said the program was cut nationally and that those funds would no longer be available.

The director highlighted how potential cuts to Medicaid and SNAP eligibility could have downstream effects on school programs. Medicaid enrollment feeds direct certification for free and reduced‑price meals and other poverty measures used in school funding and Title I eligibility; if fewer families qualify for Medicaid or SNAP, the state could see lower measured poverty rates and consequent shifts in program targeting or resources.

Agency communication methods drew questions from lawmakers. Bordenaro said the Agency distributes a weekly "superintendent's update" and uses listservs for principals, special‑education directors and other staff; she acknowledged some local educators report the information does not always reach classroom teachers and said the Agency is exploring publishing targeted guidance on its website.

Why this matters: school leaders told the committees that forward funding and existing processes should blunt immediate disruption, but districts and nonprofit partners face uncertainty about policy enforcement, legal risk, and the timing or size of future federal cuts.

Ending note: Bordenaro offered to return to brief committees as federal actions evolve and urged districts to continue usual operations while seeking legal guidance when faced with specific complaints or enforcement questions.