Across the United States, a new wave of federal budget cuts is sending ripples through communities, colleges, and households—sometimes with devastating consequences. The Trump administration’s recent moves to slash discretionary funding, delay spending, and redirect grants are drawing sharp criticism from educators, food security advocates, and lawmakers alike. As the fiscal year draws to a close, the impacts are becoming clearer, from Colorado’s rural colleges to the food banks of Washington, DC, and the halls of Congress in Washington itself.
On September 10, 2025, the U.S. Department of Education announced it would end $350 million in discretionary funding for Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs), a decision that will reverberate across states like Colorado, which boasts 14 public MSIs. According to Chalkbeat Colorado, six of these schools receive vital federal grant funding, and they’re now bracing to lose promised money starting in October. The Colorado Community College System alone will see a $5.1 million shortfall at three of its Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs): Morgan Community College, Lamar Community College, and Pueblo Community College. These funds have traditionally supported student retention and support programs, which are especially crucial for students from rural communities and underrepresented backgrounds.
The Trump administration’s rationale, as outlined in a Department of Education release, is to redirect funding to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and tribal colleges, which are defined by their histories or control rather than enrollment demographics. Colorado, notably, has neither HBCUs nor tribal colleges. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon defended the move, stating, “To further our commitment to ending discrimination in all forms across federally supported programs, the Department will no longer award Minority-Serving Institution grants that discriminate by restricting eligibility to institutions that meet government-mandated racial quotas.”
This policy shift has left Colorado’s higher education leaders scrambling. Adams State University, the state’s oldest HSI, was awarded a $3 million grant over five years in 2024 to improve college preparation, advising, and cultural understanding. Now, university spokesperson Linda Relyea says, “This challenge only strengthens our resolve,” as the school seeks alternative support from private and individual donors. CSU Pueblo, which became an HSI in 2007, stands to lose $3.6 million over the next three years, and spokesperson Gena Alfonso warned, “The remaining resources are not sufficient to continue programs at their current level.” Fort Lewis College, a Native American-Serving Nontribal Institution since 2008, will forfeit $2.27 million from the final two years of its grant, threatening programs that help students acclimate to college and stay on track to graduate. “For many of these students, FLC provides a crucial path to an affordable four-year college degree while remaining close to their families and communities,” spokesperson Nardy Bickel told Chalkbeat Colorado. “We are disappointed about the decision to cut funding to this program, which will be felt deeply across our campus.”
But the budget axe isn’t falling only on higher education. In the nation’s capital and surrounding areas, food insecurity is spiking to alarming levels, a trend exacerbated by the Trump administration’s cuts to federal jobs and social safety nets. The Capital Area Food Bank’s annual survey, released September 25, 2025, paints a sobering picture: 36% of households in the Washington, DC area reported experiencing food insecurity over the past year. For households with direct or indirect federal government employment that experienced job loss, the numbers are even more dire—41% reported food insecurity, and two-thirds of those described their situation as “very low food security,” meaning they faced disrupted eating patterns and reduced food intake.
Radha Muthiah, CEO and president of the Capital Area Food Bank, told CNN, “Seventy-five-thousand more people are now saying that they’re severely food insecure, and so that means they’re reducing the size of their meals, they’re skipping meals, this includes children as well. And so that is disturbing to us as a finding.” The survey, conducted in May in partnership with NORC at the University of Chicago, also found that 74% of affected households are tapping into their savings to make ends meet, 55% have stopped contributing to long-term savings, and nearly a quarter have dipped into retirement funds earlier than planned.
The root of the problem? The Trump administration’s drive to shrink the federal government—the nation’s largest employer—has led to thousands of job losses. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, the Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia region lost approximately 22,100 federal employees between January and May 2025. The downstream effects are widespread, touching not only laid-off government workers but also contractors, service industries, and local businesses that depend on federal spending. Local food banks, such as Small Things Matter in Rockville, Maryland, and the Arlington Food Assistance Center in Virginia, have reported a noticeable uptick in demand since the start of the year. Roxanne Yamashita, executive director of Small Things Matter, shared with CNN, “We have noticed an uptick and are seeing some federal employees at our community-wide food distributions.”
Further complicating the fight against hunger, the Trump administration is also terminating the federal government’s annual report on food insecurity, making it harder to track the scope of the problem in the future. Meanwhile, Congress has passed a domestic agenda package that will slash food stamp benefits, leaving about 2.4 million fewer Americans with assistance each month. “What we’ll see is people cutting back on various kinds of services because they want to save money,” Charles Meng, CEO of the Arlington Food Assistance Center, told CNN. “The bottom line is, we’re going to see many more of the same families we already see because they’re going to be cut first.”
In Washington, the administration’s approach to spending is also drawing scrutiny for its legality and transparency. The litigation-focused group Protect Democracy has accused the White House of making “backdoor cuts” by delaying or withholding funds that Congress already approved. Their analysis, reported by The Telegraph, found that more than 62% of funding for substance abuse reduction programs and 82% of higher education support funds had not been sent out to intended recipients as of late September 2025. If these funds aren’t committed by September 30, they’ll enter a five-year limbo before possible cancellation, raising the stakes for recipients and lawmakers alike.
Senators Susan Collins and Cory Booker took the unusual step of writing to the administration on September 25, urging full funding—not elimination—of 21 educational and cultural exchange programs approved earlier in the year. “These funds are a lifeline for communities on the front lines of the overdose crisis,” said Libby Jones, program director at the Global Health Advocacy Incubator. But as Protect Democracy’s Cerin Lindgrensavage explained, “The cuts that we have been tracking fall in areas where the Trump administration has already proposed significant cuts for next year, but they’re making them happen now rather than seeking to get Congress to agree to them for the future.”
With a potential government shutdown looming on October 1, tensions are running high on Capitol Hill. Republicans have largely focused on blaming Democrats for threatening a shutdown, while Democrats are leveraging negotiations to push for healthcare fixes and alternative funding priorities. Meanwhile, the administration’s late-year funding strategies—described as “stealth cuts” by critics—are deepening distrust between Congress and the executive branch, raising uncomfortable questions about the balance of power and the future of federal support for vulnerable Americans.
The consequences of these budget maneuvers are already being felt in classrooms, kitchens, and communities across the country. For many, the uncertainty is as troubling as the cuts themselves, leaving students, families, and local leaders to wonder what comes next—and how they’ll bridge the growing gaps left by disappearing federal support.
