The appropriations cycle to determine funding levels for federal programs for fiscal year 2026 does not lack the usual controversies that typically surround the appropriations process. When the federal government is unable to pass the twelve appropriations bills into law by the end of the current fiscal year (September 30), that typically triggers the threat of a government shutdown that can only be avoided by either passing these twelve bills, passing a long or short term Continuing Resolution (CR), or a combination of passing a portion of the 12 bills coupled with a CR for the pending bills. A CR, for those new to the scene, is a funding mechanism that allows the government to continue operating at the previous fiscal year’s funding levels while lawmakers obtain additional time to draft, negotiate, and pass an appropriations package.

Fiscal year 2025’s appropriation cycle came to an end when the House and Senate both voted to pass a year-end Continuing Resolution, thus funding FY 2025, using FY 2024 funding levels.

One of the difficulties in passing all twelve appropriations bills stems from the requirement of reaching 60 votes in the Senate, which puts lawmakers in the position of negotiating with members of the opposite party to thus generate a bipartisan appropriations package.

However, with this particular cycle, there is a new element to consider: rescission requests from the administration.

A rescission occurs when the presidential administration requests that Congress revoke funds previously appropriated for federal programs. Congress has 45 consecutive days to either grant or deny the president’s rescission request. Once a rescissions package reaches the floor for a vote, it can pass with a simple majority in either chamber. Rescissions pose a threat to creating a bipartisan funding product, as it is conceivable that funds that can be appropriated can then also be returned by the administration under a rescission request, with limited influence from the party in the minority.

President Trump’s budget request calls for substantial cuts to discretionary programs; Appropriators in the House and Senate have been unveiling their bills and moving them out of committee, with few of them making it to the floor. However, as things stand, with one and a half months left before the end of the fiscal year, both chambers are far apart in funding levels. With that in mind, let’s take a look at what we know so far about the proposals on the table.

President’s Budget Request

In May, President Donald Trump released his budget request for FY 26. The Trump administration’s budget request features funding elimination of key programs community colleges leverage for institutional and student support such as the Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant (SEOG), TRIO, GEAR UP, Child Care Access Means Parents in School (CCAMPIS), Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP), the Postsecondary Student Success Grant (PSSG), and Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP).

The proposal to eliminate funding for these programs is in addition to decreasing funding or restructuring other programs. For instance, President Trump is calling for a 22.8 percent decrease in the maximum Pell award that would amount to a $1,685 cut from the current $7,395 level. Furthermore, his budget requests an 80 percent decrease in Federal Work Study while also proposing to reverse the employer and federal government contributions so that employers would pay 75 percent of a student’s wage, with the federal government contributing the remaining 25 percent. 

In terms of restructuring, President Trump is proposing to level fund the Career Technical Education program while blocking community colleges from using these funds. Moreover, the Trump administration has proposed to eliminate the Strengthening Community College Training Grant (SCCTG) in favor of consolidating it with other workforce-related programs that would create the Make America Skilled Again block grant.

While the Trump administration has requested funding cuts and eliminations for a variety of higher education and workforce development programs, it has also proposed level funding for Title III and Title V minority serving institutions (MSIs) programs.

Senate Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies (LHHS) Bill

The Senate LHHS appropriations bill strikes a much different tone from the President’s budget request. For most of the programs the administration is aiming to eliminate funding for, the Senate is proposing to maintain the FY 24/25 funding levels. Yet, the Title III-A, the Strengthening Institutions Program (SIP), proposed for elimination by President Trump, is slated to receive a $5 million cut, which is a reduction of 4.5 percent, should the Senate bill become law. Simultaneously, the Senate also proposed a $5 million increase and an $85 million increase for both the Postsecondary Student Success Grant (PSSG) and Head Start, respectively. Please view Table 1.0 below for additional information.   

Besides diverging from the President’s budget proposal, the Senate LHHS appropriations bill features “bill strengthening provisions” intended to maintain the integrity of the bill as it reaches implementation. Specifically, the Senate LHHS appropriations bill includes language that asks agencies to notify the Appropriations Committees of intentions to terminate or not continue a grant with an accompanying reason for such action; make funding opportunities appropriated by this bill available; and provide the Appropriations Committees a written notice of plans intended to increase, decrease, transfer, or reorganize its workforce.

Looking Ahead

The next step is to stay tuned for developments that will take place in the House Appropriations Committee. As of the authoring of this article, the House LHHS subcommittee is scheduled to hold a markup on September 4th, with the full committee markup on September 9th. While the details of the House plan are still uncertain and will be revealed during the House LHHS markup, what is known is that the spending cap for LHHS programs is set to $184,491,000,000, which is nearly a 7 percent decrease from FY 2025. How the Departments of Education and Labor’s funding will fare is unclear.

In the meantime, ACCT encourages community college leaders, students, and stakeholders to engage in advocacy in support of federal programs that support our institutions and students. Specifically, we are urging continued investments in the Pell Grant Program by increasing the maximum award by $200 to maintain its purchasing power; reversal of cuts made to SIP; and maintaining SCCTG funding to support community colleges’ workforce training capacity.

During the August recess, lawmakers are back home in their states and districts, making this an ideal time to meet with them and point out both the importance of these programs and how much they have contributed to the success of the institution, students, and the community. For strategies on how to engage with your federal elected official, please take a look at the ACCT NOW piece, Congressional District Work Period: An Opportunity for Community College Leaders for the 119th Congress.

Finally, it is important to keep in mind that the President’s budget is a request that the House and Senate may or may not consider when appropriating funds to essential federal programs. As such, reaching out to your lawmaker can help ensure that federal programs will still be there to support community colleges, their students, and the overall community.

Table 1.0: Summary of FY24/25 Funding Levels, the President's Budget Request, and Senate LHHS Appropriations Bill 

Genesis Santiago is the Senior Government Relations Associate at ACCT

Photo Credit: Budget illustration (By the Blue Diamond Gallery, Creative Commons BY-SA 3.0).