We’re excited to share that Brian K. Bridges, former New Jersey Secretary of Higher Education, is W/A’s newest senior advisor.

Dr. Bridges joins W/A after overseeing statewide higher education policy and coordination during a period marked by not just the fallout from COVID-19, but also the implementation of a new state plan that guided New Jersey institutions through unprecedented disruption and advanced initiatives to expand affordability and opportunity.

This week, Kentucky became the latest state to opt into the Education Freedom Tax Credit (EFTC), the federal scholarship program established under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that allows taxpayers to claim a dollar-for-dollar federal tax credit for donations to scholarship-granting organizations (SGOs). Thanks to a legislative veto override by a Republican supermajority in both chambers, Kentucky is now the second state with a Democratic governor to opt into the program.

Much of the attention around EFTC opt-ins has focused on governors, and for good reason: The 29 states that have opted in to date have done so with the support of their governors—most through straightforward executive action. However, the federal statute (26 USC 25F) doesn't limit opt-in authority to governors: the election "shall be made by the Governor of the State or by such other individual, agency, or entity as is designated under State law to make such elections on behalf of the State with respect to Federal tax benefits."

Kentucky's H.B. 1 shifted the opt-in authority away from the governor and to the Secretary of State. Whether or not the federal statute only allows for a preexisting state-law designation, rather than one created via the bill that opts the state into EFTC, has yet to be litigated and likely won't be fully resolved until the U.S. Treasury issues final regulations. More to come.

Kentucky isn't the only state where a Democratic governor and a Republican legislature are at odds over the EFTC. There are five such states in 2026:

Kentucky's override was clean: a simple majority threshold, supermajorities in both chambers. Wisconsin and Arizona aren't realistic override candidates under their current compositions. North Carolina is contested; Republicans have the Senate supermajority but are two seats short in the House, meaning they'd need at least two Democratic defectors.

Kansas is the other state to watch. Republicans hold margins that easily clear the two-thirds threshold in both chambers, and they're already moving. H.B. 2468, which elects Kansas into the federal tax credit program, has passed the Senate and is awaiting a final House vote on the conference version before heading to Gov. Kelly's desk. An override looks likely.

Kentucky's move comes amid a broader softening of Democratic resistance to the EFTC. The EFTC has the potential to put a significant sum of money on the table (potentially as much as $3.1 billion in California alone). And even if a state doesn't opt in, its residents can still donate to SGOs in other states and claim the federal benefit — meaning the question for governors is less whether the money flows, and more so whether it flows to their state. Opting in gives governors the opportunity to shape how the program operates and who benefits, including public school students. 

Colorado's Gov. Jared Polis opted in early; North Carolina's Gov. Josh Stein vetoed the opt-in bill but said he'd participate once Treasury issues "sound guidance"; and Hawaii and New Mexico, both previously “noes,” are now openly reconsidering their position.

Students who graduate ninth grade “on track”—with enough credits to move to 10th grade and no more than one failed course—are 3X more likely to graduate than their peers. But what does it look like to drive outcomes in ninth grade at scale?

Join district leaders to hear how a systemwide focus on ninth grade is driving measurable gains. This conversation will go beyond theory to unpack what actually makes ninth-grade success scalable: from on-track rates and attendance to teacher retention and dual enrollment.

🗓️ Thursday, April 16 at 12:30 p.m. ET

Featured Speakers

This message is brought to you by the Center for High School Success, who is currently offering a grant subsidy to new district partners for SY 2026-27 to reduce the cost of high-impact supports.

On Thursday, ED announced a new Interagency Agreement (IAA) with the U.S. Department of Treasury (Treasury). Under the agreement, Treasury will assume responsibility for the collection of defaulted federal student loans, and over time, provide “operational support” to ED on the collection of all federal student loan debt.

This is the 10th IAA ED has brokered with other federal agencies—including the U.S. Department of Labor, HHS, and State—to offload its federal program management responsibilities since the start of President Trump’s second term.

You may remember that last March, President Trump suggested that oversight of federal student loans would be shifted to the Small Business Administration. While ED highlighted Treasury’s capabilities to manage financial and information technology systems and its experience collecting delinquent and defaulted debt for federal agencies, Secretary McMahon did not specify why Treasury was determined to be a better fit than SBA.

What are the terms of the IAA? The IAA will have a phased implementation:

Importantly: Federal law mandates that ED continue to carry out its responsibilities over student loan policy development and the administration of the FAFSA and the National Student Loan Data System. However, ED is also winding down its responsibilities to the “maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law,” as ordered by President Trump on this day last year.

Hosted by ISTE+ASCD and Whiteboard Advisors, the Solutions Summit is a one-day, exclusive event that convenes leaders from across the education ecosystem. This year’s Summit will be held on Sunday, June 28, 2026, from 9 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. and will feature a mix of interactive panels and small-group activities focused on real-world decision-making, product impact, and the future of learning.

On March 20, the White House released its National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence: Legislative Recommendations, a brief document outlining what the Administration wants Congress to do on AI. It is not a rule, regulation, or executive order. It is advisory and directional, intended to shape the legislative agenda.

The brief includes seven thematic sections, each with a short framing statement followed by specific asks to Congress: 

We are following the final two sections most closely for their potential impact on the education industry.

The workforce and education section is brief. It asks Congress to incorporate AI training into existing education and workforce programs through non-regulatory means, expand federal study of AI-driven labor market shifts, and bolster land-grant institutions as hubs for AI youth development. The framing is consistent with the Administration's broader preference for using existing structures rather than creating new programs or federal bodies.

This section is likely to generate the most attention—including among education policy audiences—because it addresses federal preemption of state AI laws. The Trump administration recommends that Congress establish a national AI standard and preempt state laws that impose "undue burdens" on AI development and use. 

However, the framework also explicitly preserves state authority to regulate each state's own use of AI, including in public education and law enforcement, and to enforce generally applicable laws protecting children and consumers.

That carve-out matters. It suggests states may retain meaningful room to set policies governing how AI is used in schools, even if federal laws eventually constrain state-level regulation of AI developers.

This White House framework arrives as youth tech and AI policy related legislation rise in prominence at the state and federal levels. Whiteboard Advisors has been tracking this rise closely—from the Senate's bipartisan "Plugged Out" hearing on youth technology and online safety earlier this year, to the three distinct state-level tracks taking shape around cellphones, screen time, and social media platform regulation. The White House framework adds an additional layer to that conversation, particularly on child protection and preemption, without fully resolving the questions states and districts are already navigating.

Whether Congress moves quickly on any of these recommendations remains to be seen. For now, the framework is best read as a statement of intent.

A U.S. district court ruled this week that Arkansas’ Act 573—a law passed in 2025 that requires public schools in the state to “prominently” and “conspicuous[ly]” display the Protestant version of the Ten Commandments in all classrooms and libraries—violates the First Amendment. Implementation of Act 573 is now blocked in the six school districts attended by children of the plaintiffs in the suit; Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (R) said that the state intends to appeal the ruling. [K-12 Dive]

A new JFF survey shows 44% of workers believe AI does more harm than good for job searching, wealth building, and quality of life. Employees point to limited training and uneven access to AI tools, with only about a third feeling adequately supported at work. Ben Pring, vice president of JFF’s Center for Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Work, said the results show "growing concern about the pace of AI adoption and a clear gap in employer support." [HR Dive]

Check out W/A Jobs, which features 3,864 career opportunities from 316 organizations across the education industry. A few roles that caught our eye over the past week: