Comment on FR Doc # 2026-12861

I am writing as a private citizen who cares about fairness, local control, and making sure every student in this country, regardless of background, has the opportunity to succeed in school. I am not an educator or school administrator, but I follow education policy because I believe federal resources should be used efficiently and effectively to help schools serve all their students well. I am writing in response to the proposed rescission of 34 CFR Part 270, which governs the Equity Assistance Centers (EAC) program. I oppose this proposed rescission. I understand these centers exist to help schools and districts comply with civil rights law in a practical, common-sense way, not to impose a one-size-fits-all mandate from Washington. EACs work directly with local districts and state agencies, who remain in the driver's seat, to resolve problems before they turn into costly litigation or federal enforcement actions. That is good for taxpayers and good for local control: it keeps decision-making close to the communities it affects while ensuring schools meet their existing legal obligations. On cost, the EAC program is a remarkably efficient use of federal dollars. The four regional centers together received roughly $7 million in Fiscal Year 2024, covering technical assistance for school districts and state agencies across the entire country, including every state and several territories. By comparison, the Department's Office for Civil Rights, which handles civil rights complaints and enforcement after problems have already occurred, operates on a budget of roughly $140 million a year. A $7 million investment in proactive, practical assistance that helps districts resolve issues before they become formal complaints, expensive litigation, or federal enforcement actions is a fraction of the cost of dealing with those problems downstream. That is the kind of prevention-oriented, fiscally responsible approach taxpayers should want more of, not less. Importantly, this support is not targeted at any single group. Federal civil rights protections in education cover all students, including boys facing disparate discipline, students with disabilities, English learners, rural and low-income students, religious students seeking accommodation, and many others. Every district, in every state, red or blue, urban or rural, can face a civil rights compliance question at some point, and EACs give them a trusted, knowledgeable partner instead of leaving them to figure it out alone or hire expensive outside counsel. Eliminating this program does not eliminate the underlying legal requirements schools must meet; it simply removes the free, practical assistance that helps them meet those requirements efficiently and stay out of legal trouble. In summary, the EAC program is a cost-effective, locally-oriented investment, a few million dollars a year that helps schools serving every kind of student comply with the law without unnecessary red tape, litigation, or expensive federal enforcement, and the Department has not shown that this capability would be preserved if eliminated. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Department to withdraw this proposed rescission and preserve the EAC program under 34 CFR Part 270. Thank you for considering my comment.