Federal Power, Local Consequences: A 100-Day Policy Review
Summary
We’re three weeks out from President Trump’s first 100 days back in office—and while the headlines often focus on what’s been said, we’ve spent the last few months tracking what’s actually happened.
Since January, we’ve analyzed how the administration has approached core policy areas, from federal agency restructuring to infrastructure funding, public health, and procurement. While many executive orders have been signed, few have moved through Congress or undergone full regulatory implementation. Still, the early directives provide a clear preview of this administration’s governing philosophy: centralization of executive authority, regulatory rollback, and a preference for privatization over public investment.
Over the next two editions of the Compass, we’re doing a policy sweep: what’s changed since we last reported, what hasn’t, and what that means for Pennsylvania and Philadelphia going forward.
This list is formatted in order of our blog posts. You can find them here.
Education
-
On March 20, President Trump signed an executive order directing the dismantling of the U.S. Department of Education. The order outlined a phased reallocation of responsibilities to the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services, signaling a broad shift away from federal oversight of education policy (White House Fact Sheet, March 2025).
-
Pennsylvania receives more than $4.6 billion in federal education funding annually, supporting programs like Title I, special education, Pell Grants, and early learning initiatives. In Philadelphia, where the school district is already managing a $300 million shortfall, federal cuts could directly affect classroom staffing, support services, and college readiness programs.
-
While the Department of Education has not yet been formally dissolved, several key grant programs have been suspended, including a $600 million teacher training initiative that supported workforce development in high-need districts.
-
We anticipate growing pressure on state education departments to absorb administrative and compliance duties previously handled by the federal government. That will be a heavy lift in Pennsylvania, where state-level education staffing has remained flat for years. School districts and nonprofits working on education access may need to expand their grant tracking, legal compliance, and program evaluation efforts—all without additional resources. Legal challenges to the DOE’s restructuring are expected to continue, especially around civil rights enforcement.
Pennsylvania officials, including Governor Josh Shapiro, have pledged to maintain commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion in education despite federal pullbacks. However, advocates warn that the loss of federal oversight could deepen disparities for students in under-resourced communities. As political battles over curriculum and equity intensify at the state level, the stakes for local decision-making in education will only grow.
Transportation and Infrastructure
-
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, which insures nearly 3.5 million residents through Medicaid—including 750,000 covered through expansion—could face billions in federal funding losses under a capped funding model. These changes would directly threaten the infrastructure of care across both urban and rural communities. Governor Josh Shapiro and the Department of Human Services (DHS) have voiced strong opposition, and their concerns are shared across party lines.
While the state is actively working to strengthen the Medicaid system—including increasing 2024 reimbursements to Managed Care Organizations (MCOs) to stabilize provider networks and address inflationary cost pressures—these gains could be undermined by federal caps. The recent adjustments were specifically designed to:
Sustain provider participation by offsetting rising labor and operational costs.
Maintain critical access to behavioral health, maternal health, and primary care services.
Support rural hospitals and safety-net institutions facing financial fragility.
Encourage investment in community-based care and preventative models.
Knowledge Base:
Expansion: Medicaid expansion, a key provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), allows states to expand Medicaid coverage to low-income adults with incomes up to 138% of the federal poverty level, increasing access to healthcare for previously uninsured individuals.
Proposed federal changes would threaten these objectives by:
Jeopardizing home- and community-based services, particularly for seniors and individuals with disabilities.
Undermining rural hospital solvency, especially in areas already struggling to attract healthcare professionals.
Disrupting behavioral health and substance use treatment systems, many of which are dependent on Medicaid expansion.
Reducing provider participation, as capped rates may no longer cover basic service delivery costs.
Straining workforce pipelines, by creating financial instability for agencies that serve as clinical training sites.
During recent Pennsylvania Health and Human Services budget hearings, several Republican senators raised concerns about the state’s ability to maintain solvency for rural hospitals and healthcare providers. They emphasized the growing crisis in rural healthcare—pointing to provider shortages and ongoing hospital closures as urgent challenges. Their comments reflected deep concern about how proposed funding changes could further erode access to care in their districts, underscoring a bipartisan recognition of Medicaid’s critical role in sustaining rural health systems and ensuring quality care statewide.
-
Pennsylvania had secured $143.6 million in federal support for a second daily Amtrak route between Harrisburg and Pittsburgh—funding that’s now under review. In Philadelphia, where SEPTA depends on federal capital assistance, the risk of stalled modernization projects is growing. Projects tied to the NEVI Formula Program, which supports EV infrastructure, also face uncertainty under the new administration’s posture toward clean transportation investment.
-
In March, Elon Musk, now head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), called for full privatization of Amtrak, labeling it “inefficient” and “obsolete.” Amtrak CEO Stephen Gardner subsequently resigned, raising alarms among transit advocates and states that depend on federal partnerships to maintain long-distance service.
-
Federal funding cuts will likely shift more infrastructure financing responsibility to states and municipalities. Pennsylvania may have to reallocate state funds or restructure existing agreements to maintain project momentum. Long-term, the federal government’s exit from public transportation support could widen geographic and income disparities, particularly for communities outside of high-profit corridors. Expect delayed projects, constrained transit authorities, and increased reliance on public-private models moving forward.
Healthcare
-
Description text goes here
-
Pennsylvania’s Medicaid expansion covers more than 3 million people—many of them in rural counties and urban centers like Philadelphia. Freezing funding or restructuring the program would have wide-reaching implications for hospitals, managed care providers, and safety-net clinics. Community health centers, already stretched thin, have reported confusion about what services are reimbursable and whether they’ll receive expected Title X funding for women’s health programs.
-
In March, clinics in Western PA—particularly those serving low-income and uninsured patients—began furloughing staff after Title X funding was delayed due to administrative backlog. Meanwhile, the regulatory freeze has caused downstream confusion in telehealth billing and maternal health incentive programs across the state.
-
If block grants materialize, Pennsylvania will face hard decisions around eligibility, coverage, and provider reimbursement. Local and state-level health officials are preparing for different scenarios, including the need to implement cost controls, reduce covered services, or seek supplemental funding through nonprofit and philanthropic channels. Expect advocacy efforts to intensify around maternal health, reproductive access, and community clinic stabilization.
Procurement
-
In March, President Trump signed an executive order directing the General Services Administration (GSA) to consolidate federal procurement of goods and services across agencies. The stated goal is to eliminate redundancy and reduce waste—but early reactions suggest that the move could upend existing supplier relationships and introduce new barriers for small and mid-size contractors.
-
Philadelphia is home to dozens of companies—especially in professional services, technology, and construction—that receive federal procurement contracts. Small and minority-owned businesses may struggle to compete under a more centralized system, especially if existing agency-specific programs like 8(a) and HUBZone are absorbed or phased out. These firms are often local employers and community investors, meaning any disruption could have ripple effects on job growth and neighborhood stability.
-
So far, the GSA has not released a formal implementation plan, but several federal agencies have paused or delayed contract awards in anticipation of new guidance. The uncertainty is already affecting planning for 2025 bids, with some vendors reporting withdrawn solicitations or unexpected rejections based on eligibility updates.
-
Trade groups are encouraging vendors to prepare for system migration and to expect new GSA-wide vehicles to replace agency-specific ones. In the short term, fewer contract opportunities and tighter competition could make it harder for small firms to survive in the federal space—particularly those without the administrative support to navigate new procurement systems.
Environment and Energy
-
In one of his first moves after taking office, President Trump declared a national energy emergency, directing agencies to fast-track approvals for fossil fuel extraction and energy infrastructure. The orders reversed course on environmental policies from the previous administration and reaffirmed support for coal, oil, and natural gas development. This included designating coal as a “critical mineral,” a symbolic and policy-driven reclassification meant to expand mining on federal land.
-
Pennsylvania—long known for its energy sector—has felt these shifts in both economic and environmental terms. While the natural gas industry may benefit from accelerated permitting and reduced oversight, many communities in Philadelphia and beyond are facing renewed concerns over pollution, public health, and the degradation of environmental protections. Air quality, flood mitigation, and urban tree canopy efforts—especially in under-resourced neighborhoods—are now at greater risk. The withdrawal of federal climate resilience support threatens programs at both the city and state levels.
-
The administration signed additional executive orders in March expanding coal mining and allowing older coal-fired power plants to stay operational. However, in a sign of the market’s continued pivot, the decommissioned Homer City Generating Station in Indiana County is being redeveloped into a $10 billion data center powered by natural gas and renewables. Despite federal efforts to revive fossil fuels, private investment continues to favor transition technologies.
-
We expect continued legal and legislative tension between federal deregulation and Pennsylvania’s commitments under initiatives like RGGI. Cities like Philadelphia may need to pursue local mitigation and adaptation strategies without federal support. For community organizations and environmental nonprofits, the challenge will be accessing resources and building partnerships to continue this work independently. As with other sectors, federal rollbacks may increase the burden on local governments to step in where Washington pulls back.
Immigration
-
In January, the Trump Administration issued a series of executive orders dismantling long-standing protections for undocumented immigrants, expanding ICE enforcement, and limiting access to public benefits. One of the most consequential changes was the rollback of the “sensitive locations” policy, which had restricted enforcement activity in schools, hospitals, and houses of worship.
-
With more than 50,000 undocumented residents, the city’s immigrant communities feared increased ICE presence and fewer legal safeguards.
-
Enforcement activity has increased in neighboring counties, with legal service organizations documenting a rise in detentions and expedited removal proceedings. Philadelphia continues to resist federal encroachment, but funding threats from the administration remain in place for sanctuary jurisdictions. Local nonprofits are seeing spikes in demand for legal services, emergency shelter, and family support—all while navigating uncertainty around federal grant programs tied to immigration response efforts.
-
We expect continued legal battles over the constitutionality of ICE’s expanded powers and funding clawbacks. Local governments like Philadelphia are preparing to defend their policies in court. For service providers and grassroots advocates, the work is both legal and deeply logistical: ensuring that communities have accurate information, access to legal representation, and the confidence to continue accessing services without fear.
Housing
-
Federal housing policy under President Trump has shifted toward deregulation, with an emphasis on removing environmental and labor rules that the administration claims delay construction. However, there’s been no indication of expanded federal investment in affordable housing, public housing capital needs, or voucher programs.
-
Philadelphia has an affordable housing shortfall of over 70,000 units. Without new federal support, the city risks deepening the gap between new development and affordability. Local housing authorities and community development corporations rely on a mix of tax credits, federal grants, and HUD funding to close deals—many of which are now in limbo. Construction timelines are being extended, and financing gaps are increasing, especially for smaller and mission-driven developers.
-
In March, Mayor Cherelle Parker unveiled the $2 billion HOME (Housing Opportunities Made Easy) initiative to create and preserve 30,000 housing units over the next five years. The initiative represents the city’s most ambitious housing investment in decades and is expected to include both market-rate and income-restricted units.
New federal tariffs on imported construction materials, including steel, aluminum, and electrical components, are also driving up costs—placing additional strain on already fragile project budgets. For developers relying on public-private financing stacks, even modest cost increases can make or break a deal, threatening the pipeline of new affordable units across the region.
-
The success of HOME will hinge on how the city navigates rising construction costs, land availability, and shifting federal commitments. Many developers and nonprofit housing organizations are now reconsidering the feasibility of projects already underway. With tax credits in high demand and HUD funding uncertain, financing may become more complex—and more local. Community advocates are also calling for deeper affordability thresholds to ensure that new units actually serve the city’s most vulnerable residents.
Read More
