Citizen Portal
Sign In

Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows

Get Lifetime Access

States' role, designees and public lists of approved programs debated at DOE rulemaking

U.S. Department of Education Negotiated Rulemaking Committee · January 8, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Negotiators debated whether the regulation should require governors to designate a designee, how governors should involve state higher education agencies, and whether states can be required to publish program‑level lists; Department said it will encourage coordination but lacks statutory authority to mandate some actions and will explore data availability in Partner Connect.

Negotiators spent substantial time on the allocation of authority between governors and the Secretary and on transparency about which programs states approve.

The department explained why it removed a formal ‘‘designee’’ process from the regulatory text: its view is that governors should be able to use other agencies, but that the statute and Department of Labor guidance mean the department should explain that option outside the regulations. Merrick Laco of the Department of Labor described common state board compositions under WIOA and said many states already include higher‑education officials on workforce boards.

On publication of lists of governor‑approved programs, the department acknowledged the public‑interest value but said program‑level data exchange between states and federal systems is limited; Federal Student Aid staff said Partner Connect provides institution‑level information and the agency would explore whether program‑level extracts exist. Negotiators urged the department to require plain‑language explanations of state approval processes in the preamble or guidance if not in the regs.

The session included detailed Q&A on whether a governor could submit a single packet that included completion and placement metrics and how that would affect Secretary determinations, and whether dormancy or inactivation of a program should count as failure; the department said it prefers operational solutions but is open to proposed regulatory language from negotiators.