Northwestern Lehigh board hears briefing on federal school funding after public concern about Department of Education

At a recent Northwestern Lehigh School District board meeting, residents pressed the board about national proposals to shrink or eliminate the U.S. Department of Education and asked how lost federal dollars would affect local services. District staff presented a breakdown showing federal revenue represents a small portion of the district’s general fund but supports specific positions and programs.

The issue drew public comment from Tara Ballinger of Heidelberg Township, who said, “It’s very real at this point that they’re gonna dissolve the department of ed and probably take funding from schools.” Ballinger asked whether the district could notify the community and urged parents to contact elected officials.

District staff told the board that overall federal funding—when combined in the general fund—amounts to roughly 1% of total general fund revenue. “So our federal funds represents approximately 1% of our total fund general fund revenue,” staff said, and explained how those federal dollars are used in local programs.

Why it matters: the district said federal funds are modest in size but targeted. Title I (about $237,000 in the district this year) supports partial salaries for three professionals and an instructional assistant at Northwestern Elementary, and funds family engagement and MTSS activities at that building. IDEA funding, routed through the intermediate unit, contributes partial salaries for about 12 special-education teachers and two instructional aides; the percentage of any single staff salary covered by IDEA ranges roughly from 2% to 9%, staff said. Child nutrition dollars flow to Fund 51 (food service) and do not appear in the general fund line items.

Staff and board members said no district programs exist today that would be supported exclusively by federal funds. “None,” a staff member said in response to a question about whether any program would vanish immediately if federal funds disappeared. The district added that, in aggregate, federal dollars would not fully fund additional full‑time positions: staff estimated the total federal funding roughly equates to a handful of full-time positions if converted to salary and benefits.

Staff clarified the timing and budgetary mechanics: formula programs such as Title I and federal formula IDEA are forward-funded—meaning appropriations for fiscal year 2025–26 are already set at the state level—so the district is not scheduled to lose those 2025–26 dollars immediately. “This means that the funding for a given fiscal year is appropriated in the prior year, ensuring a level of budgetary stability,” staff said, and noted the governor’s proposed budget included line items for Title I and IDEA for 2025–26. Staff warned the risk would be greater in fiscal year 2026–27 depending on federal and state decisions.

Practical consequences discussed: the board and staff outlined two categories of impact. First, partial salary support from Title I and IDEA means the district would need to reallocate local dollars if federal funds diminished over time; staff described these as partial offsets rather than entire positions. Second, child nutrition programs—currently delivering free breakfast and lunch to qualifying students—are funded in the food service fund; loss of those dollars would force choices about negotiated contracts or whether families would be charged, the board said.

Board and public reaction: some board members and attendees voiced skepticism about the federal Department of Education’s current role and bureaucracy; one board member said unfunded mandates from federal reporting have been expensive over time and suggested state administration of funds could be preferable. Other community members urged active public advocacy to preserve funding. Carrie Alexander of Heidelberg Township thanked staff for the presentation and reiterated concern for less‑resourced districts, saying she worries about a gradual erosion that could force future millage increases.

Next steps: staff said the board had already placed a full presentation on its agenda under old business to provide the detailed federal funding percentages and program buckets. Board members suggested the topic will recur during budget season, and the district will continue to monitor state and federal developments and report back to the board. The district also provided the board with current free‑and‑reduced percentage figures (about 22.85% free; roughly 2.9% reduced) that staff said could change slightly due to program relocations with the intermediate unit.

Ending: The board did not take formal action on federal policy at the meeting. Staff recommended continued monitoring and briefings as the governor’s and federal budgets evolve.