Loss of research funding
If the US government ended or reduced support for special education research, would anyone miss it?
The Institute of Education Sciences, the source of substantial funding for research in education was one of the casualties of the US efforts to promote government efficiency, reduce waste, promote “colorblind” policies, seat authority for education in the states, dismantle the Department of Education, and otherwise remake the US government during the first months of 2025 as the administration of Donald J. Trump began. Regular readers of Special Education Today may recall that there were stories about media coverage of the changes in February of 2025 (e.g., ““US ED research contracts cancelled: Will government support of special education research be eliminated?” 12 February 2025) and subsequent pushback from research organizations (e.g., “Research organizations sue sue ED”).
But, perhaps IES will get a reprieve. It may be assisted in recovering from its wounds. On 30 May 2025, the Department of Education announced the appointment of Amber Northern as a special assistant who will be responsible for advising the department about refocusing IES’s research efforts. In the press release announcing Amber Northern’s appointment, Education Secretary Linda McMahon said,
As we return education to the states, it’s essential that educators have access to accurate data to inform their work and develop best practices. Dr. Northern’s deep expertise in education statistics and years of experience in the classroom will be an asset as we re-envision the work of IES,” said U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. “Our goal is to ensure educators have access to reliable and innovative resources that improve outcomes for all students, and we are excited to have Dr. Northern lead the charge.
I got to thinking about IES and, especially the National Center for Special Education Research that is one of the branches or sections of IES. And I got to thinking about other sources of funding from the US government for educational—especially special educational—research. And I thought about whether one might consider some of the products of government-supported research efforts in the past to have proved useful.
What are the sources of funding?
I am by no stretch of the facts (let alone the imagination) an expert on federal funding of research. Also, the following analysis is reflective of a seat-of-the-pants approach. For both those reasons, readers should not take it as the definitive (“last”) word on the topics. Here, however, are some notes I’ve amassed in the recent past.
NCSER awarded close to $1B between 2002 and 2020, according the NationalAcademies Press in diverse (excuse me) areas of research (see, e.g., Klager & Tipton, 2021). It funded projects examining preliminary explorations, development and innovation, efficacy, effectiveness (replication), measurement, and more.1 Here is a simplified look at the growth in the level of NICSER funding over time.
Although NCSER is a big bucket of funding for special education, it’s not the only game in town. Other agencies also fund research in special education.2
Elsewhere in the US Department of Education, the Office of Special Education Programs funds activities in personnel preparation, technical assistance, and model demonstrations. Although the work primarily provides services, some of these projects also conduct research.
The National Science Foundation has historically funded research in areas closely related to special education. For example, think of efforts to include students with disabilities in programs of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (“STEM Access for Persons with Disabilities”). But that’s just an illustration. NSF has funding initiatives such as the “Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Science,” “Division: Research on Learning,” “Research in Disabilities Education,” and “Disability and Rehabilitation Engineering” But NSF’s STEM programs were deeply cut in early 2025. According to data collected by Grant-Watch.us about NSF, 18 projects having to do with disabilities and valued at almost $20M were cut in the first months of 2025.3
The National Institutes of Health funded extensive research on learning disabilities from the 1980s forward. Reid Lyon led the charge and funded systematic and refined studies about reading instruction. Other foci at the National Institute Child Health and Human Development focus on intellectual and developmental disabilities coordinated by, fittingly, “Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Branch. There is also the Child Development and Behavior Branch, which supports some research about atypical developing, including learning disabilities. Although there are strong emphases on basic sciences in these branches, applied research is also supported.
It is probably not advisable to abate one’s breathing while waiting to see what will happen with all of these research funding sources in the current US climate of change in federal spending and support. One might just pass out from the lack of oxygen. But it is probably savvy to keep up with news on these matters.
On 5 August 2025, the Institute for Higher Education Policy published “Three Things to Know About the Senate’s IES Funding Proposal,” and the title got me to click on the post. It’s interesting, but it’s more of a statement about general policy and doesn’t have anything to say about our interest ares.
A couple of readers of SET are following developments closely as a part of an ad hoc assembly of advocates for lots of different research in education. I hope we can convince them to provide updates about research funding related to special education and disabilities.
Stay tuned!
Footnotes
Readers savvy about the ways of IES funding might see the familiar ideas of Goal-I, -II, -III, etc. founding in this list. There is a correspondence between those familiar terms and the areas where funds went, but it is not complete. NCSER funded other activities, such as methods studies, training, and so forth, too.
Readers who are well-informed about the funding for the programs listed in the following bullets: Please provide assistance about how such funding has changed over the years and what part may actually be spent on research.
Grant-Watch.us uses crowd-sourcing to assemble data about cuts and revisions in projects. Thus, one is trusting self-reported data. In addition, I didn’t have a way to delve into individual projects to determine in what way they addressed disabilities.
When the current administration began rescinding grants, I saw some education adjacent people on X who were not exactly supportive of the administration but were arguing we hadn't gotten anything for our investments in education research over the years. One poster asked some version of the question, "Can you name anything we use in schools today that was developed by education research funding?"
Of course, an informed responder could list many, many things, but the question from a fairly well-informed poster made me realize we need to do a better job of proclaiming the successes of education research to wide audiences. I think professors are often averse to self-promotion and the perception of being another snake-oil salesperson, but if we want the public to care about these cuts to education research, we have to show them what they are getting for their money.
Thanks so much for this information, John. Let's also remember that funds are needed to support teacher education and leadership training, and states are in no position to manage or award such funding to IHEs.