Comment on FR Doc # 2026-10620

I support the purpose of the Arts in Education National Program and the use of federal arts-education funds to serve children and youth, especially students from low-income families and students with disabilities. My concern is not with arts education or with continuity of valuable services. Rather, because the Department proposes to provide another year of funding to the incumbent grantee without a new FY 2026 competition, the final waiver should strengthen the public record explaining why that bridge is necessary, how the current project has performed, what alternatives were considered, and how the Department will preserve a meaningful competition in 2027. I recognize that a full FY 2026 competition may be genuinely infeasible given the limited time remaining before the end of the fiscal year and the Department’s stated need to develop a valid priority. My concern is not that the Department should necessarily complete a full competition before September 30, 2026. Rather, the Department should explain why that timing problem requires a full additional year of noncompetitive funding to the incumbent grantee. The final notice should address whether the Department considered a shorter or conditional bridge, such as funding only the period needed to prevent interruption while preparing a new competition, identifying a target date for a new notice inviting applications, or structuring continuation funding around specific interim milestones. If a competition could reasonably be prepared shortly after the close of FY 2026, the Department should explain why a continuation through September 30, 2027 is necessary rather than a more limited bridge. The Department should also provide current performance information for the existing project. The public record should summarize who has been served, in what locations, through which activities, and with what outcomes, including information about services to low-income students, students with disabilities, educators, national partners, and participating schools or communities. A finding that the grantee can continue approved activities is useful, but capacity to continue is not the same as evidence of recent performance or public value. The Department should revise its analysis of affected entities. The current grantee is not the only entity practically affected by this waiver. Other eligible national nonprofit organizations are affected because they lose a FY 2026 opportunity to compete for these funds. Schools, educators, students, and communities are also affected because alternative arts-education models are delayed. Finally, the Department should address the institutional context surrounding this proposed continuation award. The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts has recently undergone significant governance and public-controversy changes. Those circumstances do not by themselves mean that valuable arts-education services should be interrupted. But they do make transparency especially important when the Department proposes another year of noncompetitive federal funding to the same institution. The final waiver should explain whether recent governance, leadership, programming, branding, renovation, closure, or litigation developments could affect the Arts in Education National Program project, its national partnerships, its services to students and educators, or its ability to carry out the approved scope and objectives of the FY 2022 grant. If the Department finalizes the waiver, it should expressly bound the action as a one-time bridge through September 30, 2027, identify milestones for developing the 2027 priority and competition, and explain how it will prevent this continuation from advantaging the incumbent in that future competition.