Section-By-Section Summary of Key EDGAR Proposals for Education Researchers

This section-by-section resource summarizes proposed changes of particular relevance to education researchers in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) updating the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) and identifies issues members may wish to address in their comments. An EDGAR FAQ is also available from EducationCounsel and provides additional details on the proposed updates and their potential effects on Department of Education grantmaking.

Several of these updates parallel provisions in the proposed Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance (see AERA comments) and National Science Foundation (NSF) Proposal/Award Information Guidance on Financial Assistance (GFA) (see AERA comments). In general, AERA members are encouraged to recommend that the Department not finalize overlapping EDGAR provisions until OMB completes its government-wide rulemaking and fully considers the concerns raised through the public comment period.

As stated in the NPRM, comments should “clearly identify the specific section or sections of the regulations that the comment addresses and be in the same order as the regulations.” Commenters should include Docket ID ED-2026-OPEPD-2542 at the top of their submissions. Comments are due September 23 and can be summitted through regulations.gov.

§ 75.210 – General Selection Criteria

• Among several updates to the selection criteria, the proposed rule would remove references to serving “underrepresented populations” and generally replace this language with “target population.” New language is also proposed to align with language in § 75.500 requiring Department of Education grantees to apply “highest standards” in decisions concerning program enrollment and participation.
• Under the consideration of “Quality of the project evaluation or other evidence-building” (§ 75.210(h)), the proposal removes references to What Works Clearinghouse standards.
• Under the consideration of “Strategy to scale” (§ 75.210(i)), the proposal removes references to the people and partners, including “underrepresented populations,” that the Department may consider in evaluating a project’s scale-up strategy.
• See EducationCounsel redline for a full comparison of this section with the 2024 EDGAR final rule.

§ 75.228 – Procedures to Indicate Preference on Lower Indirect Cost Rates

• Proposes a new section that would enable the Secretary to give a competitive preference to applicants from institutions with a lower indirect cost rate. This language parallels the proposed OMB Regulation for Federal Financial Assistance, which would provide preference for grants to institutions with lower indirect cost rates.
• Defines “lower indirect cost rate” to include:
  • Using an indirect cost rate that is lower than the applicant's approved negotiated indirect cost rate that the applicant would otherwise be entitled to take, including not charging indirect costs at all.
  • Electing to use the de minimis indirect cost rate for competitions that do not require special indirect cost rates.
• Comments should oppose this new language, as it would conflict with process for Department of Education competitions that include scientific peer review.

§ 75.230 - How the Department Makes a Grant

• Adds a new paragraph that would not guarantee future funding for a multi-year grant, including through continuation awards.
• New language: “Neither the approval of any application nor the award of any grant commits or obligates the Federal Government in any way to make any additional, supplemental, continuation or other award with respect to any approved application or portion of an approved application.”
• On its face, removing commitment to future-year continuation of grant funding would create uncertainty for maintaining the use of educational interventions, data collection, and professional development support for educators in Department of Education scientific research grants.

§ 75.252 - Frontloading of a Multiyear Project

• Adds a new section that would provide a process for “frontloading” multiyear grants with partial or full funding at the grant outset.
• Section 77 includes a new proposed definition of “frontloading.”

§ 75.253 - Continuation of a Multiyear Project After the First Budget Period

• The proposed language in this section would place increased authority by the Secretary and expanded review for Department of Education grants to receive a continuation award after the first year of a multiyear grant.
• This new language would also link to the expanded termination and suspension “for convenience” proposed in § 75.901.

§ 75.500 - Constitutional Rights, Freedom of Inquiry, and Federal Statutes and Regulations on Nondiscrimination

• Adds new language for direct grant programs requiring grantees to ensure that grant-related hiring, admissions, promotions, and compensation practices are based on merit and high standards; that employment practices do not “compel statements of belief in support or opposition to any political views as a condition of employment, admission, or project participation;” and have policies protecting freedom of speech, inquiry, and press.
• Similar language is included in update to § 76.500 for state-administered formula grant programs.

§ 75.901 - Suspension and Termination

• The proposed updates to this section would enable the termination of Department of Education grants “for convenience of the Secretary,” aligned with the similar update to enable discretionary termination of grants in section 2 CFR 200.340 of the proposed OMB Regulation on Federal Financial Assistance. The section also references sections 2 CFR 341-342, which in the proposed OMB rule would not require an agency to provide a rationale for discretionary termination of grants mid-cycle and would limit opportunities to appeal a discretionary grant termination.
• Comments should oppose the inclusion of “termination of convenience;” require reference to the specific program goal, agency priority, or national interest that the grant no longer effectuates that is the basis for the discretionary termination and included in the notice of funding opportunity; and allow the opportunity to appeal a “termination of convenience.” As a whole, this provision would create uncertainty for maintaining the use of educational interventions, data collection, and professional development support for educators in Department of Education scientific research grants.

§ 77.1 – Definitions

• Includes two new definitions of “evidence framework” and “frontloading.”
• Revises several additional definitions, including for “strong evidence,” “moderate evidence,” and “promising evidence” to align them with the definitions in the Every Student Succeeds Act.
• Proposes updates to the definitions of “experimental study,” and “quasi-experimental study” that remove references to What Works Clearinghouse standards and advance specific types of studies that meet the definitions.
• Additional reference: Comparison of the 2026 proposed “evidence” definitions to the final 2024 rule