CLASP
The Center for Law and Social Policy
This statement can be attributed to Cemeré James, interim executive director of the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
Washington, DC, March 12, 2025—Yesterday, the Trump Administration slashed half of the U.S. Department of Education’s workforce when it laid off approximately 1,300 career staff and 600 probationary employees. A nation’s strength is built on the strength of its public education system, and these actions purposely weaken not only American education but America itself. Mass layoffs also undermine the economy and, if left unchecked, will lead to higher unemployment.
For 46 years, the Department of Education (ED) has helped advance and protect equitable educational opportunities for all students seeking to learn in the United States. The Trump Administration’s “final mission” for the department is to intentionally dismantle it, disregarding both its importance to the nation and the profound unpopularity of shuttering the ED. Allowing Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency to operate the federal government like a private equity firm and unilaterally strip federal agencies of valuable people and resources will be ruinous to students, families, communities, and the economy.
Yesterday’s action is particularly concerning because of the impact on marginalized and vulnerable student populations. Public school systems that rely on federal spending will face increased difficulty in continuing to educate students. With a greatly reduced staff, the ED’s Office of Civil Rights cannot fulfill its obligation to vigilantly enforce federal civil rights laws in schools and among other recipients of ED funding. Researchers will struggle to analyze educational outcomes produced by various federal programs after the elimination of the National Center for Education Studies. Postsecondary students will be unable to begin or continue their educational pathways with the loss of staff capacity to manage financial aid awards. The harm of these cuts to students with disabilities, including the effects on early intervention programs for young children, remains unacknowledged by a Secretary of Education who struggles to remember what IDEA (the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) stands for.
The administration has no intention of resolving these concerns or communicating how it will replace the ED’s essential services and programs. Since Inauguration Day the administration has wielded authority without regard to the democratic process, ignoring the laws or livelihoods they break.
CLASP stands ready to work with and on behalf of students, families, and communities to advance and protect the educational rights of all students. We call on federal and state policymakers to oppose these reckless actions and take steps to slow down and mitigate the harm while also supporting children, families, and educators at risk. In addition, we call on our partners in the education and children’s advocacy space to join the effort to push back against these harmful attacks, which are an affront to our collective goals to build a more just and equitable country.
By Teon Hayes
Budget numbers can feel distant, as if they’re just abstract figures debated by those with privilege in the halls of power. But behind those numbers are people, families, and entire communities that will bear the brunt of decisions made in Washington. The House Budget Resolution proposes sweeping cuts that would affect the amount of groceries people can buy, the education of our children, and access to life-saving health care. The real-world consequences of these reductions will be devastating for millions of Americans.
Food on the Table: The Impact of Agriculture Cuts
For many families, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the difference between having food on the table and going hungry. The proposed $230 billion in cuts to agriculture would likely mean deep reductions to SNAP, hitting families with low incomes, seniors, and children the hardest. These cuts could lead to stricter eligibility requirements, reduced benefits, and rising rates of food insecurity.
For example, a single mother in North Carolina has a full-time job but still struggles to afford groceries for her children. SNAP helps her bridge the gap, ensuring that her family has nutritious meals. If these proposed cuts go through, her family could see their food assistance slashed or eliminated, forcing this mother to make impossible choices between paying rent and feeding her kids.
The Cost of Cutting Education: A Blow to Future Generations
Education is often hailed as the great equalizer but slashing at least $330 billion from education funding threatens to widen disparities and limit opportunities for the next generation of leaders. This isn’t just about numbers; it’s about lost opportunities for millions of students.
Imagine a high school senior in rural Pennsylvania who dreams of becoming a nurse. He plans to attend a public college, relying on federal grants and affordable tuition to make his education possible. However, if these cuts become reality, the public college he wants to attend may be forced to raise tuition, reduce financial aid, and cut essential student support services. A reduction in education funding could mean fewer grants and higher student loan burdens, discouraging this student from pursuing the education he needs to thrive in the workforce. As a result, the cycle of poverty continues.
Decrease in Public Higher Education Appropriations per Full-Time Equivalent Student by State, FYI 2001-2023
Source: “Threats to the Department of Education: Private Equity Replacing Public Funding”
The Human Cost of Health Care Cuts
The proposed draft directs the committee that handles Medicaid to cut at least $880 billion, which will likely affect Medicaid most directly. This would have catastrophic consequences for millions of individuals who rely on the program for health care. These cuts could result in reducing coverage for essential services, increasing the number of uninsured Americans, and possibly closing hospitals and nursing homes.
Picture a diabetic patient unable to afford insulin, a child missing critical treatments, or a senior losing access to home health care. Stripping away Medicaid funding doesn’t just take away health care. It endangers lives.
Beyond the Numbers: Why This Matters
These proposed cuts represent real consequences for real people. While policymakers may see this as a fiscal decision, for millions of Americans, it’s a question of survival.
As these discussions unfold, we must ask: who benefits from these cuts, and who suffers? A budget is a moral document that reflects our priorities as a nation. What kind of country do we want to be: one that invests in its people, or one that turns its back on them?
This budget doesn’t just reduce spending; it threatens the stability of millions of families. Single mothers, high school seniors, people with chronic illnesses – they are just some of the real people who will feel the impact of these choices. The United States should be investing in policies that lift people up—ensuring that children have enough to eat, that schools have the resources to educate, and that communities have the support they need to be healthy and thrive.
By Christian Collins
Throughout the 2024 campaign cycle, post-election messaging, and proposed administrative appointments, the incoming Trump Administration has sent a clear message that undermining educational access for marginalized populations will be a priority. These pledges include loosening protections placed by the outgoing Biden Administration against sex and gender identity discrimination at federally funded schools, weakening educational accessibility for immigrant students, and decreasing the racial diversity of the postsecondary system. The most direct threat has been the repeated promise of closing the federal Department of Education (ED) in its entirety, a move that has been attempted multiple times since the department was founded in 1979 but that has failed in every instance.
This brief details the threat that the new administration poses to ED and its impact on post-secondary institutions. It analyzes how there is little political will to close ED, but significant federal education funding cuts are a possibility. Next, the brief outlines how postsecondary institutions are looking to private equity firms to cover potential financial shortfalls and provides policy recommendations for institutions, policymakers, and advocates on pathways to fiscally protect the postsecondary system.
By Christian Collins
The Leadership Conference Education Fund, in collaboration with CLASP, recently released We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education. The agenda, which has been endorsed by NAACP, the National Urban League, and the National Women’s Law Center, offers 100 specific strategies that federal and state policymakers and institutional leaders can adopt to ensure postsecondary educational access for all students regardless of racial identity.
Our postsecondary system continues to navigate uncertain waters that include mitigating the impact of recent Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) challenges, direct political threats to end the federal Department of Education, and continued roadblocks placed on long-needed debt relief for student loan borrowers. Opponents of racial progress in education have used both this tumultuous period and recent legal victories to apply pressure on institutions to no longer incorporate racial equity in postsecondary education. Institutions, policymakers, advocates, and other stakeholders must not use these challenging times to cede victories to the anti-racial equity movement, but as an opportunity to utilize strategies like those outlined in We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education to publicly reaffirm their commitment to a postsecondary system that removes, not reinforces, obstacles to equity.
Equity and Diversity Remain Compelling Interests in Postsecondary Education
Last year’s Supreme Court rulings on the constitutionality of race-conscious admissions were the onus for the We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education. In these decisions, the Supreme Court upended more than four decades of precedent and weakened equal opportunity in college admissions. Race-conscious admissions policies were one of few protections that racially marginalized students had from a postsecondary system that has never been meritocratic.
National reaction to the loss of race-conscious admissions showed that the lack of meritocracy is not just evident within the educational outcomes experienced by different demographics, but also within the way we publicly discuss the impact of the loss. The bulk of institutions under scrutiny with their latest admissions classes are highly selective and often private “elite” institutions, whose status is intrinsically tied to creating admissions scarcity by rejecting applicants along racial and socioeconomic lines. However, the loss of race-conscious admissions will impact enrollment and retention at all institutions, ranging from the most selective to community colleges.
The current narrow scope of evaluating the loss of race-conscious admissions has diminished the urgency to end current policy and cultural assaults on institutions offering educational opportunities for underrepresented students. Removing race-conscious admission practices has not stopped opposition to diversity, and restoring the small number of admissions at highly selective institutions that were available through those policies should not be the end of transforming the postsecondary education system.
The 100 recommendations outlined in We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education encourage the entire postsecondary system to engage in the work of removing racially based educational barriers that plagued the system even with race-conscious admissions in place. Contrary to the argument that any diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility efforts now violate federal law, the recommendations in this agenda comply with federal statutory and constitutional terms.
A lack of broad implementation of policies like prioritizing recruitment of rural students of color and community college transfers; bridging resource gaps faced by institutions serving higher proportions of traditionally marginalized students; and expanding the basic needs supports available for students cannot be blamed on the loss of race-conscious admissions. Yet these policies, along with others highlighted in We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education are necessary to expand educational opportunities.
Just Like a Tree Planted by the Water
We Shall Not Be Moved: A Policy Agenda to Achieve the National Imperative of Racial Equity and Diversity in Higher Education represents a call to action for the postsecondary education system and its stakeholders. It calls for restoring the system to where it was before the loss of race-conscious admissions and also redesigning the foundational policy blocks that make up the system. These recommendations will not remedy every malaise currently impacting postsecondary education; but they offer a bold reimagining of how postsecondary education can become an educational system that remedies its prior history of discrimination for the benefit of all students.
By Christian Collins and India Heckstall
The Biden-Harris Administration’s student debt relief efforts aim to alleviate the burden on borrowers, particularly those from marginalized communities. Despite the Supreme Court blocking broad forgiveness under the HEROES Act, the administration has forgiven $167 billion through targeted measures like the SAVE Plan, which caps payments at 5 percent of income and forgives debt after a set period. Reforms to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program and support for defrauded students have also been key. However, recent legal and legislative challenges threaten these efforts. With the fiscal year 2025 budget cycle approaching, increased funding for Pell Grants and tuition-free community college initiatives are essential for reducing and preventing student debt. Policymakers must act to protect these gains and support future debt relief efforts.
By India Heckstall
In 1954, the landmark Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional, marking a pivotal moment in the struggle for civil rights in the United States. While this decision was a crucial step toward equality in education, its promise remains unfulfilled.
Despite significant progress in expanding opportunity to Black Americans since Brown, K-12 school districts remain deeply segregated and unequally resourced. Racial disparities in access to college preparatory coursework and discriminatory admissions practices persist. Black and Latino students’ college completion rates are behind those of white students. And segregation remains a reality in higher education, with declining representation of Black students at selective universities even before the 2023 Supreme Court decision banning affirmative action in college admissions.
On the 70th anniversary of the Brown decision, it is important to consider its legacy in the aftermath of last year’s Students for Fair Admission (SFFA) v. Harvard and SFFA v. University of North Carolina. The SFFA ruling declared that holistic admission policies explicitly considering race were a violation of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.
The litigation was the culmination of a decades-long battle fought in both the courts and the ballot box to dismantle race-conscious admissions policies in higher education.
Notably, both sides in the debate over the constitutionality of affirmative action and school integration evoke Brown to justify their positions, but to very different ends. Brown itself hinged upon the 14th Amendment. NAACP Legal Defense Fund lawyers built their case on proving that segregation of Black children into separate and inferior schools, a requirement of the Jim Crow era, violated their rights to equal protection.
Unfortunately, affirmative action opponents—including SFFA and the court’s conservative majority—have weaponized Brown to support their view that the Constitution will only allow race-neutral policies to undo past racial harm. Advocates call this a perverse reading of Brown, which catalyzed the broader effort to desegregate housing, employment, and public accommodations. Alongside major civil rights legislation that outlawed discrimination and efforts by colleges to diversify and integrate their campuses, Brown kicked open the door to postsecondary education for Black Americans, who had been systemically excluded for more than two centuries.
Yet paying homage to Brown should not prevent us from acknowledging its limitations. Despite his optimism, NAACP lawyer who argued the case and future Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall’s prediction that schools would desegregate within five years never came to pass. Efforts to racially integrate schools encountered massive resistance in the South and in Northern cities that attempted busing. What advocates may not have fully grasped at the time were the systemic discrimination and racial biases embedded in K-12 and higher education that would play out over the decades and blunt Brown’s impact.
The Johnson Administration realized that desegregation and other policies built on the principle of equality under the law would be insufficient to produce racial equality. As President Johnson noted in his 1965 Howard University commencement speech, affirmative action recognizes that “it is not enough to open the gates or opportunity”—it was necessary to ensure “all citizens…have the ability to walk through those gates.” True racial justice was not just “equality as a right…but equality as a result.” As Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in her SFFA dissent, “[d]eeming race irrelevant in law does not make it so in life.”
As a race-conscious policy, affirmative action in college admissions worked. By equalizing access to education and upward mobility, these programs more than doubled the share of Black undergraduates from 1965 to 1998, better reflecting America’s racial diversity. Data has also shown what happens when affirmative action ends: Black student enrollment plummets, as it did in California and Michigan after state bans went into effect.
Since the 2020 racial justice protests and the SFFA decision, advocates and researchers have become more vocal about articulating a view Johnson expressed so many years ago: policies that are race-neutral in theory are rarely so in practice. They fail to account for the structural inequities built into our institutions and the compounded disadvantages experienced by communities of color. From the New Deal to the Great Society, race-neutral policies led to worse outcomes for Black people in either their design or implementation.
Predictably, the SFFA ruling has also unleashed an ugly backlash against all programs intended to level the playing field between Black and white Americans, including initiatives to create more diverse, equitable and inclusive environments in K-12, higher education, and the workplace. Research has shown that diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and racially integrated schools not only boost outcomes for students of color, but also prepare all students to compete in a multicultural, globalized economy.
The headwinds facing racial justice advocates will grow stronger during this election year in our historically polarized country. As we reflect on Brown’s legacy, we must confront the reality that educational equity remains an elusive goal. Race-conscious policies and programs must be essential tools in our fight. To deliver on Brown’s moral vision, we must redouble our efforts to dismantle systemic barriers by acknowledging and honoring our racial differences—not pretending they don’t exist.
A Black History Month Reflection on Key Leaders in the Fight for Civil Rights
As we approach the closing days of Black History Month, now is a good time to reflect on the memories and positive stories associated with the 60th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act. But the work started by many of those we honor this month is far from over.
Cash Assistance is a Critical Part of Reproductive Justice
The conversation on reproductive justice has been front and center in many spaces following the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision. Many advocates, organizers, and policymakers have united across issue areas to support reproductive rights—specifically access to safe, affordable, and accessible abortion. However, economic insecurity and poverty are incompatible with reproductive justice.
Challenges to Just and Effective 988 Implementation
Youth and young adults currently face an unprecedented mental and behavioral health crisis that has led to an increase in youth suicide rates, mental and behavioral health concerns, and disconnection from school and work. This series of fact sheets explores the challenges and missed opportunities to effectively implement the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline and transform our country’s existing mental and behavioral health crisis response system.
Making USDA More Equitable
In 2022 Elizabeth Lower-Basch was appointed to serve on the USDA Equity Commission, which released its final report today at a meeting where she served as a panelist. In a blog, Elizabeth shares her reflections on the Commission’s work and its 66 recommendations for improving equity in the USDA’s many policies, practices, and programs, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
This new report examines the pivotal role of Historically Black Colleges & Universities (HBCUs) in addressing the educational needs of students of color, particularly Black immigrants, amid systemic inequities in postsecondary education.
CLASP in the News & Partner Blogs |
|
FEBRUARY 21, 2024 | THE HOPE CENTER |
|
FEBRUARY 14, 2024 | INSIGHT INTO DIVERSITY Op Ed: SCOTUS Ruling Disproportionately Impacts Opportunities for Black Males |
Upcoming Events
February 28: Christian Collins will give a virtual guest lecture to graduate students in the Sports Administration program at UNC-Chapel Hill on his Equal Play, Unequal Pay report. The lecture will also focus on the unique ways that college athletics and public policy intersect.
Recent Events
February 22: Isha Weerasinghe presented to a cohort of 13 state legislators who are part of the Future Caucus on the importance of addressing maternal mental health.
February 13: The Biden-Harris Administration brought together nearly 90 young people from across the nation for the first-ever interagency Youth Policy Summit: Cultivating Possibilities. New Deal for Youth Changemakers and members of CLASP staff served on the youth planning committee, helped with preparation, moderated panels and discussions, and attended the event.
Sign up for more updates like this, directly to your inbox!
By India Heckstall, Christian Collins, Felecia Russell, and Melquin Ramos
The report “Fostering Inclusion for Black Immigrant Students at HBCUs” examines the pivotal role of Historically Black Colleges & Universities (HBCUs) in addressing the educational needs of students of color, particularly Black immigrants, amid systemic inequities in postsecondary education. Despite facing declining enrollment, HBCUs remain vital for fostering academic success and socioeconomic mobility, especially for Black immigrant students. The report highlights challenges such as declining enrollment, financial barriers, and limited support for immigrant students. It offers policy recommendations that emphasize the importance of auditing admissions policies, building supportive environments, and expanding access to federal financial aid. Collaborative efforts between federal agencies, states, and institutions are crucial to creating inclusive environments and removing barriers for Black immigrant students, thus promoting equity and diversity in higher education.
By Sapna Mehta
1. Executive Summary
In 2021 and 2022, President Biden signed three critical bills into law—the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), and the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors and Science Act (CHIPS and Science Act). They provide nearly $2 trillion in federal infrastructure, clean energy, and technology funding with the potential to create millions of good jobs in local communities. Together they have the potential to revitalize the U.S. labor market and pave the way toward diversifying a range of occupations and industries. These laws stand to modernize and enhance the transportation, energy, clean water, and digital sectors by directing significant funds toward these efforts.
These laws stand to modernize and enhance the transportation, energy, clean water, and digital sectors by directing significant funds toward these efforts.
- IIJA alone invests a historic $1.2 trillion over 10 years in rebuilding crumbling roads, bridges, and public transportation systems. It also supports advanced energy technologies, environmental remediation and resilience, and clean water infrastructure; closes the digital divide; and modernizes the electric grid.
- IRA allocates $369 billion over 10 years for clean energy production, climate solutions, and environmental justice.
- The CHIPS and Science Act authorizes $52.7 billion over 10 years to encourage the construction of semiconductor manufacturing facilities, boosting the nation’s science and technology base and bolstering national and economic security.
These measures hold promise to increase economic opportunity and security for workers with low incomes, people of color, and women. Yet jobs in many of the industries experiencing investment are disproportionately held by white men. Turning these investments into high-quality jobs for women, people of color, and persons with low incomes will require intentional efforts to address their severe underrepresentation in the industries where federal investments are flowing.
In this report, the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) aims to support national, state, and community leaders and advocates in navigating these laws by:
- Providing a high-level overview of the IIJA, IRA, and CHIPS and Science Act;
- Identifying the workforce and supportive service funding opportunities within the infrastructure laws;
- Highlighting initiatives that can promote equity in infrastructure jobs; and
- Recommending a preliminary set of action steps for local and state advocates that can help ensure infrastructure jobs benefit women and people of color.
To make certain that women and people of color can access and remain in the jobs being created through these new public investments, advocates can look to existing successes in advancing workforce training, including registered apprenticeship programs and sector-based strategies discussed later in this report. They can also work with the public and private sectors to develop Project Labor Agreements and Community Benefits Agreements on new projects to create equitable training pipelines for local workers, ensure the jobs created pay family-sustaining wages, and include robust labor protections.
Producing equitable outcomes will require elected leaders, advocates, workforce practitioners, and the private sector to work closely together to ensure equitable, effective, and responsive workforce development programs and pipelines to recruit, train, hire, and retain women and people of color. This includes creating access to supportive services, like funding for tools, child care, and transportation, all of which are necessary for successful job training completion and retention.
Throughout this report, CLASP spotlights state and local policy and program examples. The report also shares guidance from the federal government and resources from partners. Appendices at the end offer links to additional federal and partner resources.
2. Introduction
Over the next decade, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), and Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors and Science Act (CHIPS and Science Act) aim to invest nearly $2 trillion to repair, rebuild, and modernize the nation’s infrastructure along with its energy and technology production capabilities. These investments hold promise to increase economic opportunity and security for workers with low incomes, people of color, and women.
Yet jobs in these industries are disproportionately held by white men. While women hold 11 percent of jobs in the construction industry, they are most frequently found in administrative roles, which make up a small percentage of overall jobs in the industry. [1] The Institute for Women’s Policy Research found that women hold just 4 percent of the jobs in construction trades—jobs like carpenters, electricians, pipefitters, and painters. [2]
The construction industry remains predominantly white, [3] and racial and gender disparities compound inequities for Black, Latina, and Afro-Latina women. Women who hold these jobs face rampant workplace harassment. Nearly a quarter of women who work in the construction trades report frequent sexual harassment. Additionally, 21 percent of women of color report they frequently face racial harassment. [4]
Without deliberate efforts, these inequities will persist. The National Partnership for Women and Families estimates that, if nothing changes, women will access only 29 percent of new jobs created by IIJA. Racial disparities are even more stark, with data projecting that:
- Black women will access less than 4 percent of jobs;
- Latinas will access less than 5 percent of jobs; and
- Asian and Pacific Islander women will access less than 2 percent of jobs. [5]
At the same time, without thoughtful planning now, states, localities, and private companies may begin new projects only to discover they can’t find workers with the training needed to fill the new jobs. McKinsey & Company estimates that without additional investment in worker education and training, companies across industries will face a shortfall of 300,000 engineers and 90,000 technicians by the end of the decade. [6] The public and private sectors can collaborate with the workforce system, labor unions, and worker organizations to cultivate the workforce needed to make the United States more competitive and resilient and meet national security goals.
Attaining this workforce is possible through the development of robust, equitable, and accessible training, hiring, and retention pipelines. The IIJA, IRA and CHIPS and Science Act, collectively referred to in this paper as “the infrastructure laws,” incentivize the development of training plans and encourage partnerships among local and state governments, employers, labor unions, community groups, and workforce training providers like community colleges. Successful implementation of the infrastructure laws will require strategic coordination and alignment across these entities.
Advocacy is crucial to promoting equity and progress and to reversing years of systemic misogyny and racism in many of the industries receiving federal investment, the labor market, and beyond. Only when local and state advocates, community groups, worker centers, and labor unions engage local and state governments, workforce entities, and employers will the nation ensure that women and people of color access the new jobs created through investments from the IIJA, IRA and CHIPS and Science Act.
3. Overview of Recent Federal Legislation
The IIJA, also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), authorizes $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years to rebuild roads, bridges, and public transportation systems; support advanced energy technologies and clean water infrastructure; close the digital divide; and modernize the electric grid. [7] The law is estimated to create more than 700,000 jobs per year over the next 10 years. [8]
Provisions in the legislation, punctuated with additional White House guidance, enable federal agencies to implement IIJA by supporting—and often preferencing—good quality jobs with labor protections and equitable workforce training. A number of programs also have set asides for disadvantaged communities, which are discussed later in this paper.
Most construction projects are subject to wage standards under two federal laws known as the Davis-Bacon Act [9] and the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts. [10] Together, these laws require all federal and federally assisted construction projects to pay workers the prevailing wage. The Wage and Hour Division of U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) conducts surveys of local labor markets to determine prevailing wage rates. These rates are typically set to reflect the market wage for a given type of work in a given area. The prevailing wage rate reflects both the hourly wage rate and fringe benefits. It establishes a wage floor, meaning that all contractors on a project must pay at or above this rate. [11]
IIJA funds will flow through eight federal agencies largely to states, tribes, and municipalities. They will also go to
nonprofits, labor organizations, community colleges, institutions of higher education, other nonprofit training and
educational institutions, public works departments, and private for-profit companies. Federal agencies will make
these funds available through grants, loans, loan guarantees, cooperative agreements,* and tax incentives.
*Cooperative agreements facilitate the transfer of something of value from federal executive agencies to states, local governments, and private recipients for a public benefit. While similar to grants, they include substantial involvement between the federal awarding agency and the recipient.
…
Note: This publication was updated on December 18, 2023.
By Katherine Knott, Inside Higher Ed
(EXCERPT)
Some committee members pointed out how student loan debt disproportionately impacts Black families and exacerbates inequities. “Pursuing higher education can negatively impact Black families’ wealth because of the debt burden,” said India Heckstall with the Center for Law and Social Policy, a nonprofit, and a negotiator for civil rights organizations.