Recent changes in federal education policy have dramatically impacted investments in education programs nationwide. Severe cuts at the Department of Education, Executive Orders targeting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, policies designed to shift control to the states, and other changes contributed to a turbulent year and a half for organizations working in education.
Much like what we observed regarding grantmaking for Human Services organizations over the past 18 months, Education nonprofits likewise faced dramatic shifts in the allowable use of government funds, increased competition for private funding, and substantial uncertainty.
In this article, we review key observations about grantseeking in the Education space, and strategies that Elevate’s nonprofit partners are implementing in order to navigate these changes.
What changed in the last 18 months?
Nonprofits working in the education space faced tremendous uncertainty over the past year. Noteworthy changes include:
1. Public funding contracted
In 2025, the president issued an unprecedented number of Executive Orders impacting the Department of Education, slashed the number of staff in the department in half, and sought to freeze or entirely eliminate funds from long-standing education programs. While some of the more dramatic changes were not permanent, the loss of reliable public funding had a notable impact on education organizations in the nonprofit sector.
For the nearly 5 decades since the U.S. Department of Education was founded, funds originating at the federal level distributed as pass-through grants from states have represented a significant proportion of the resources available to schools and to local, nonprofit education programs nationwide.
Because of the funding freezes, institutions providing direct education programming saw a sudden and serious reduction in funding last year. For example, In July 2025, New York Senators and Representatives signed a letter noting that previously-appropriated funds representing 10% of federal K-12 funding for the State of New York were being withheld. The six federal grant programs impacted represent some of the largest federal sources of education funding for nonprofits, which implement the adult literacy education, teacher workforce development, afterschool programming, tutoring and other educational supports previously supported under these programs.
Later in the fall, Congress ultimately rejected President Trump’s additional $7 billion in proposed cuts to the same longstanding education programs, but they did little to prevent the administration from moving K-12 grant programs to other agencies and slashing staff.
More recently, reports suggest that the administration is once again not releasing funds on the timeline recommended by Congress for the same programs that they previously tried to eliminate.
2. Private grantmaking was stable
Private foundations that support education programming remained a stable source of funding for their established partners in 2025.
However, private grantmakers on the whole did not increase funding for education programs last year. We saw very few grantmakers enter the education space for the first time. And the number of grantmakers that opted to increase their support for education last year was limited.
However, education funders are projecting increased investment in education policy change, likely in response to the current federal policy environment. A recent survey by Grantmakers for Education found that, “just over half of respondents reported supporting narrative change, up markedly from 2023. This suggests greater emphasis on exploring new strategies for moving public opinion, which will ultimately factor into public policy considerations.”
3. Corporate support changed and will likely continue to decline
One of the federal policy changes with the biggest impact on education was the widespread crackdown on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). Almost immediately after the new administration took office anti-DEI executive orders were issued.
Not long after, we saw corporations scramble to adjust their own policies with respect to DEI – whether to align themselves with the administration or to remain under the radar.
Corporate funding likewise changed. Questions regarding grantees’ leadership demographics, student populations served, and DEI commitments disappeared from funding applications practically overnight, leaving nonprofits to question how these aspects of their work would weigh into funding decisions.
Additionally, concerns about the impact of tariffs and the recently-enacted 1% floor on corporate charitable contributions may slow corporate giving. Specifically, corporations anticipating uncertain profits due to tariffs have communicated that they are postponing grant cycles or distributing fewer resources. And, most corporations currently give 1.1% of corporate pre-tax profits. If they are concerned that they won’t achieve the new 1% floor, they may have little incentive to give at all.
These variables combined suggest that corporate grants are not likely to be a robust source of support for education nonprofits hoping to replace lost public funding or reinforce a budget that is tighter than before.
How are Education Organizations Responding?
Since early 2025, organizations providing education programming have been forced to navigate substantial and continued uncertainty about the future of their public funding while facing limited opportunities to increase revenue from private funding sources.
Elevate’s partners in the education space have managed to weather the changes over the past year in a few key ways.
Drawing down existing grants in a timely and organized manner.
Much of the public funding issued to schools and education organizations comes in the form of reimbursable grants, meaning that the grantee must cover their own expenses before submitting documentation for reimbursement.
While documentation and tracking of allowable uses of public dollars has always been critical, those organizations that were the most successful in navigating the changes to their government funding in 2025 focused on thoughtfully and strategically drawing down grant funds as soon as possible, in anticipation of future program cuts or delayed funding.
Adapting to Changing DEI Terminology
Elevate staff and clients are routinely updating grant request language to keep private funders informed about how their work is impacted by changes at the local, state, and federal levels. Specifically, most organizations have reduced or eliminated an explicit focus on DEI work or terminology to remain compliant with all public funds and align with private and corporate funders’ revised application requirements.
Interestingly, education grantmakers are doing the same. Survey respondents for the Trends in Education Philanthropy report shared, for example:
- “We still say equity but may include words like opportunity, access, or belonging depending on who we are speaking with”;
- “Instead of using the terms diversity, equity, and inclusion, we use terms like democracy, egalitarian, and justice”; and
- “We use fairness, which resonates positively with everyone.”
Across the board, organizations persist in finding ways to close educational achievement and access gaps in partnership with philanthropy.
Monitoring Public Policy Changes
Policy advocacy has protected programs and funding mechanisms that are critical to delivering high-quality educational support at scale across the country.
A key policy win has been the preservation of Head Start and Early Head Start programs, which are irreplaceable without federal funding. Significant congressional oversight, combined with advocacy from industry leaders like the National Head Start Association, Zero to Three, and Save the Children helped preserve these programs in the FY26 budget. Now, advocates are looking ahead to 2027 – the current funding proposal from the administration proposes flat funding next year, which means no cost of living increases or investments in program quality.
Policy advocacy to preserve public funding goes hand in hand with raising private funds to comprehensively support educational programming. As a country, most of us still believe a significant portion of education funding should come from public sources, which means institutional and individual donors expect to supplement, but not fully fund, educational initiatives.
Exploring Creative Solutions to Gaps in Community Services
As with our social service partners, organizations working in the education space actually explored increasing services, despite the difficult funding landscape, in response to clear community needs. As afterschool programs quietly closed and education support services became unavailable, organizations serving children and families looked for ways they could step into the gap.
If you’re interested in more analysis from Elevate on the trends we are seeing in grantseeking among our nonprofit partners, check out these other articles from our blog:
And if you’re interested in exploring how Elevate can support your organization to rise to the current challenges across the sector and maximize your grant success, we’d love to hear from you! Contact us today to explore a partnership with Elevate.
You’re not imagining it—and you’re definitely not alone.
In this article, we’ll help you learn how to recognize a scam message, how to avoid scams, and other ways to protect yourself and your nonprofit from scammers impersonating government entities.
What is SAM registration?
SAM stands for System for Award Management. Annual registration with the U.S. federal government’s SAM is a required step for organizations to be eligible to receive federal contracts or grants.
Why does registering with SAM.gov Trigger Scams?
SAM.gov registrations are publicly searchable, which makes those who have recently registered or renewed easy targets for scammers. Bad actors routinely monitor the system for new listings and then launch email (and sometimes phone) campaigns aimed at creating urgency, confusion, and fear—often around compliance or payment requirements.
Elevate sees this happen regularly with our nonprofit clients, and the volume and sophistication of these scams has increased significantly in recent years.
How can I tell the difference between a scam and a credible message from SAM.gov?
While many scam messages are fairly obvious, others have become increasingly convincing. Here’s what to watch for:
1. Requests for Payment
SAM.gov registration and renewal are always free. No legitimate government entity will ask you to pay a fee to maintain your registration, expedite processing, or “avoid suspension.” If an email asks for money—stop right there!
2. Suspicious Email Addresses
Most scams come from .com or oddly structured email domains that are clearly fraudulent. However, newer scams may spoof .gov email addresses, so don’t rely on the sender name alone. Always look closely at the full email address and domain. If you’re unsure, search the email address online to see if it appears on an official government website… or if others have reported it as a scam attempt.
3. Urgent or Threatening Language
Messages that say things like “Immediate action required”, “Your registration will be terminated”, or “Final notice” are designed to pressure you into acting quickly without verifying details. This is not the language used in a credible email.
4. Unsubscribe Links or Sales-Style Language
Legitimate government communications regarding SAM registration do not include unsubscribe buttons, marketing language, or promotional offers.
5. Phone Numbers You’re Told to Call
Scam emails sometimes include a “help desk” number, or links to click for assistance. Never click on links in suspicious emails, and always verify the validity of phone numbers before you call. Visit the official government website directly to confirm contact information and where to go for assistance.
How can I avoid scams after registering for SAM.gov?
If your organization has recently completed a SAM.gov registration or renewal, here are best practices the team at Elevate recommends to of our nonprofit partners:
- Do not click links or attachments in unsolicited emails. Federal government agencies will almost always instruct you to login to your official account to view a message or complete an action, rather than providing you with a link.
- Never provide payment or banking information in response to an email.
- Verify information independently by navigating directly to SAM.gov in your browser. (Again, do not click links!)
- Forward suspicious messages to your organization’s IT security team for review.
- Expect an increase in scam attempts for several weeks after SAM registration.
We also recommend informing other members of your staff—especially finance and executive team members—that scam activity tends to spike after SAM.gov activity. Copy and paste these tips to share with them, or send them a link to this article!
A Growing Problem That Requires Awareness
What’s particularly concerning is that these scams are becoming more sophisticated. Some scammers effectively spoof official-looking email addresses and use language that closely mimics real government communications. Even experienced administrators can momentarily second-guess themselves—and that’s exactly what scammers are counting on.
Adding to the confusion, SAM.gov is not the only system being impersonated. After completing a SAM.gov registration, organizations may also receive scam messages claiming to come from other federal platforms, such as the Small Business Administration (SBA) or the Automated Standard Application for Payments (ASAP). Since ASAP is directly tied to federal grant disbursements, these scams are especially concerning. Messages impersonating ASAP are often designed to trick recipients into providing banking credentials or login information, which could give scammers access to organizational funds.
The same rules outlined in this article apply to emails involving the SBA or ASAP: legitimate government systems will not ask for payment, banking details, or login credentials via email—and they will not pressure you to act immediately. If you’re concerned, go directly to the official government website for information or updates.
Finally, if you become aware of frauds or scams, you can notify the Treasury’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) via the OIG Hotline Online Complaint Form or by phone at 1-800-359-3898 (toll free).
The good news? With a little advance warning and a healthy dose of skepticism, you can protect yourself and your organization from these types of scams.
However, over the past year, federal funding for organizations providing direct services to vulnerable groups has shrunk dramatically. This has put extraordinary pressure on foundations and other private funding streams to “make up” the difference – an ask that, as we have discussed elsewhere on this blog – is simply not feasible in light of the scale of government funding.
In a recent article, I provided some overall lessons learned from a year of grantseeking under the second Trump administration. Here, I dive a bit deeper into what we are learning from our partners operating in the social services sector, including key action steps that the most successful organizations are taking to adapt.
What changed in 2025?
Without a doubt, nonprofits supporting the most vulnerable groups saw a dramatic increase in need at the same time that federal funding cuts to essential programs rolled out throughout the year.
Specific observations that our teams supporting Elevate’s partners in the social services made over the course of the last year included:
Housing first is under attack
Under the current administration, federal policy is rapidly shifting away from a housing first model – an evidence-based approach that prioritizes stable or permanent housing for individuals experiencing homelessness without precondition and before addressing any of the underlying issues that led to homelessness in the first place.
Housing first approaches were developed in the early 1990s. Since then, housing first interventions have become the gold standard for nonprofit housing programs nationwide, and they serve as the basis for most state and federal housing funding streams.
Organizations providing housing services face the very real possibility that public funding will continue to dry up for housing first programs.
The need is extraordinary (and growing)
Over the past year, social service providers that offer case management services saw record high numbers of community members reaching out for help navigating public benefit systems, employment barriers, health services, child care, and more.
Furthermore, with increasing unemployment and skyrocketing insurance costs, there is more and more pressure on agencies providing affordable (or free) health services.
Private foundations won’t replace government dollars
Even while public funding dwindles for direct social services, private funders by and large remain uninterested in providing funding for ongoing, direct services like food pantries, case management, and housing supports.
This is noteworthy, as it is not the same behavior that we saw from grantmakers during the COVID-19 pandemic. At that time, many private grantmakers offered rapid response funding to address direct service needs. Foundations did not provide the same type of support services in 2025.
The competition is fierce, and grantmakers are taking action
Finally, as I discussed in my last article, we saw a number of grantmakers close application portals before the published submission deadline, while others required additional application steps with little notice to grantseekers.
One potential cause of this unfortunate trend is the significant increase in applications from organizations looking to replace public funding; foundation staff are simply overwhelmed by the volume of applications, and these steps serve to limit the number of proposals to review and respond to.
How are Social Service providers responding?
While these changes resulted in an extraordinary burden on human service providers, Elevate’s clients in this space took action to rise to the challenges presented. Our most successful partners adapted in a few key ways.
Leverage Individual Donor Fundraising Campaigns
Several Elevate clients turned to their base of individual donors, establishing substantial fundraising campaigns designed to meet acute, time-sensitive community needs. For example, when SNAP funding was paused and other public benefit programs shrunk due to increased eligibility requirements, our partners appealed to donors to help meet the needs of their community members.
Align Programs to Policy Priorities
Some organizations identified the opportunity to launch new programs in 2025 that were mission-aligned and addressed specific community needs, but which also remain aligned with public policy trends.
For example, organizations that sought support for addiction programs and mental health services were more successful than those that continued to focus on housing first initiatives. And, even with the recent threats to addiction and mental health services, bipartisan support for nonprofits meeting these community needs has effectively insulated these programs from more dramatic cuts to public funding.
Steward Existing Funder Relationships
Building strong relationships with your funding partners is key to any successful grant program. (If you’ve read an Elevate blog, participated in a webinar, or engaged us for grant writing services, you have likely heard us beat the drum for cultivation and stewardship!)
So it is no surprise that this tactic is key to adapting to the changes in grantmaking that we’ve seen over the past year.
Our most resilient partners in the human services sector have focused on funder stewardship, with a particular eye toward anticipating application cycles and identifying opportunities to submit grant reports and proposals early.
Nonprofits that invested in their relationships with their current funders were able to cut through the noise by maintaining relationships with program officers, differentiating their requests for support from other organizations competing for limited funding, and staying on top of their grant and report deadlines.
Are you looking for more analysis from Elevate on the trends we are seeing in grantseeking across our dozens of nonprofit partners?
Check out our observations on How 2025 Changed Grantseeking overall, and read this article from August 2025 which captures our data analysis on How the Public Funding Landscape is Shifting for Nonprofits.
And, if you’re interested in exploring how Elevate can support your organization to rise to the current challenges across the sector, we invite you to get in touch with our team! We’ll be glad to schedule a meeting to discuss your unique needs.
While the past 18 months have been marked by chaos and uncertainty, one thing is certain: 2025 undeniably changed the nonprofit sector.
Many of us are hoping that we can leave some of these changes in the past. However the reality is that many of the changes we’ve observed will drive planning, decision making, and fundraising results for nonprofits in 2026 and beyond.
At the same time, not all funder landscapes are impacted the same way; what is working (or not) for education groups is not the same for those operating in the human services space, for example.
Over the course of 2025, I hosted weekly sessions with Elevate staff to assess in real-time how grantseeking was changing for our nonprofit partners, and how we could support them in meeting the moment.
In this article, I have summarized the takeaways we captured for 2025 and what these mean for grantseekers in 2026. In subsequent articles on Elevate’s blog, I examine the specifics for those working in the areas of human services, education, the arts, and advocacy.
4 Key Strategies for Navigating the Changing Funding Landscape
Across all issue areas, there are some key strategies that Elevate teams and our nonprofit partners are using to navigate the changes to grantors’ interests, the timing of funding requests, and application requirements:
1. Prioritize Funder Stewardship
Many grantmakers are doubling down on support for their current grantees and are not accepting new applicants. In such cases, leaning into existing relationships with funders is the only path forward.
See the Meyer Foundation, for one example, which states on its website that: “In 2026, nonprofit organizations and communities across our region are navigating significant uncertainty and disruption. In response, the Meyer Foundation will focus its resources on sustaining existing partnerships and will not accept new grant applications this year.”
In other cases, foundations with open application processes were inundated with new requests. This led some to close application portals early, while others pivoted to make larger investments in existing grantees, rather than entertaining an overwhelming pool of new requests.
In this context, the most strategic nonprofit organizations are doing everything they can to stay in close communication with their key funders. If your funding needs have changed – whether due to a decrease in public funding or a new program to support your community – make sure your current grant partners clearly understand this.
Proactive communication also mitigates risk when grantors abruptly change their priorities, application timelines, and requirements; if you’re regularly communicating, you’ll be in the know when these changes come to light, so that you can be prepared to pivot your funding request as appropriate.
Because the landscape is shifting so quickly, private foundations are more cautious about investing in new organizations or issues that they don’t already know a lot about. Securing a grant from a new funder or increased funding from an existing partner is still possible, but it will result from trusting relationships (not cold requests).
2. Make the Most Flexible Ask
Whenever possible, ask funders for general support or funds that can be applied across a wide range of expenses or programs, rather than focusing your request on a specific project or program area.
While we have issued this advice to our partners even in times when the context was less turbulent, it is even more important during times like these when revenue streams and community needs are rapidly changing. This approach helps ensure that, even if your programs or priorities must shift unexpectedly, you can still fulfill your commitments to funders.
3. Forecast Funding Conservatively
While we are proponents of using your renewal grant calendar as a basis for future revenue projections, this is no longer the most prudent practice. Organizations cannot rely on past grant revenue totals to build their budgets.
Forecast future funding by closely reviewing all of your current funders. Examine their giving history and their likelihood to renew funding for your work, based on their public statements and individual conversations you have with program officers about how your work aligns with their own changing giving strategies. This practice will help you to plan appropriately for the uncertainty that lies ahead.
4. Position Your Work in a More Competitive Context
Across the board, there is increased competition for private grant dollars. This is due in large part to extraordinary cuts to public funding, which has pushed nonprofits that were largely publicly funded to pursue other revenue streams. Even those that were not immediately impacted by the loss of public funding are seeing greater competition for private dollars.
Telling a clear, authentic, strategic story that speaks to each prospective funder has become more crucial than ever.
In addition to these global strategies that can be applied across the board, we have learned that different funding landscapes are reacting very differently to public policy and funding changes in 2025 and 2026. Watch this space for specific guidance and key lessons learned by sector that will be outlined in subsequent blog articles.
