The Department of the Interior is ending dozens of partnerships with outside organizations after a department-wide review found that some agreements no longer aligned with the Trump administration’s priorities, according to a report citing department officials.
The move, led by Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, affects 43 agreements with nonprofit groups, educational organizations, conservation groups, and other outside entities. The department reportedly said the terminated partnerships were connected to programs involving diversity, equity and inclusion, environmental justice, cultural initiatives, research, internships, and support services that officials argued did not match the agency’s current mission.
According to the department, the cuts eliminate more than $4 million in planned funding. Officials said the decision followed a review launched earlier this year that identified nearly 3,000 active agreements with roughly 2,000 outside groups.
The Interior Department said the review was intended to determine whether outside partnerships provided a clear benefit to the public and supported the administration’s policy direction. Officials reportedly concluded that some groups were “operating in direct opposition” to the department’s mission or advancing priorities that conflicted with the administration’s agenda.
TRENDING TODAY
The decision reflects a broader effort by the Trump administration to reshape federal agencies around its views on energy, immigration, public lands, and government spending. Since returning to office, Trump and senior officials have moved to roll back DEI-related programs, expand domestic energy development, reduce what they describe as wasteful spending, and review federal relationships with outside advocacy organizations.
Interior officials defended the cuts as a matter of accountability. Matthew Middleton, the department’s principal deputy communications director and director of research, said the agency is ending relationships with organizations whose advocacy or programming conflicts with the administration’s goals. He said Interior would continue working with partners that expand access to public lands, support responsible stewardship, and provide tangible benefits to Americans.
Among the groups named in the report were the Hispanic Access Foundation, Latino Outdoors, the American Alliance of Museums, Conservation International, The Cultural Landscape Foundation, the National Wildlife Federation, the Doris Duke Foundation, Clean Ocean Action, the California Native Plant Society, the Green Schools Alliance, and the National Geographic Society.
The department reportedly criticized some groups for supporting DEI programs, environmental justice initiatives, restrictions on fossil fuel development, or immigration-related resources. Officials also pointed to organizations that had publicly opposed parts of the administration’s agenda.
The Hispanic Access Foundation, for example, was cited in the report because of its work with Latino communities and educational programs. Latino Outdoors was criticized for materials the department said were connected to immigration enforcement issues and for advocacy against oil and gas development. The American Alliance of Museums was reportedly flagged over work connected to diversity programs across national parks.
Conservation International was named because of its climate-related positions and criticism of fossil fuels. The Cultural Landscape Foundation was also included, with department officials pointing to its public opposition to certain administration initiatives and its work highlighting historic or cultural sites it says are at risk.
Supporters of the administration’s decision are likely to argue that federal agencies have a responsibility to ensure taxpayer dollars support the elected president’s agenda. From that perspective, partnerships with groups that oppose administration policy on energy, immigration, or DEI may be seen as inappropriate or politically conflicted.
Critics, however, are likely to view the move as part of a wider effort to punish organizations that disagree with the administration. They may argue that conservation, cultural preservation, museum programming, and community outreach are legitimate public-interest activities, even when the groups involved hold policy views different from the White House.
The dispute also raises a larger question about how federal agencies should work with outside organizations. Many departments rely on nonprofits, universities, research groups, and community organizations to carry out specialized work that government agencies may not have the capacity to do alone. These partnerships can support public education, conservation projects, internships, cultural preservation, and local outreach.
But because many outside groups also engage in advocacy, such agreements can become politically sensitive. A group may help with public lands programming while also criticizing an administration’s energy policy. Another may support conservation work while advocating for stronger climate rules. The question becomes whether policy disagreement should disqualify an organization from federal partnership.
The Interior Department appears to be answering that question more aggressively under Burgum’s leadership. The department says it wants partnerships that clearly match its mission and the priorities of the administration. Opponents may argue that the standard could be applied too broadly, cutting off groups not because their work is ineffective, but because their viewpoints are unpopular with political leaders.
The move is likely to draw more attention from lawmakers, advocacy groups, and possibly the courts if affected organizations decide to challenge the terminations. Similar disputes over federal grant cuts and DEI-related funding decisions have already become flashpoints in the broader debate over the Trump administration’s approach to government spending and ideological oversight.
For now, the Interior Department is framing the decision as a “decisive” step toward refocusing its resources. The groups affected may describe it very differently: as a politically motivated purge of organizations that support climate action, diversity efforts, immigrant communities, or conservation priorities.
Either way, the decision signals that the administration’s review of federal partnerships is not just symbolic. It is now producing real cuts, real funding consequences, and a new political battle over who gets to work with the federal government.
Why It Matters
The Department of the Interior oversees national parks, public lands, wildlife, energy resources, and major conservation programs. Its partnerships with outside groups can shape how public lands are managed, how communities access federal resources, and how conservation and education programs are carried out.
This decision also shows how the Trump administration is using agency reviews to enforce its policy priorities. Supporters see it as a needed correction against taxpayer-funded activism. Critics may see it as an effort to sideline groups that disagree with the administration on climate, DEI, immigration, or public land policy.
What Comes Next
The Interior Department is expected to continue reviewing outside partnerships and funding agreements to determine whether they align with the administration’s mission.
Affected groups may respond publicly, seek political support from lawmakers, or challenge the cuts if they believe the terminations were improper. The issue could also become part of a broader congressional debate over federal grants, environmental policy, DEI programs, and the role of advocacy organizations in government partnerships.
Fox News Politics reported that the Interior Department is ending 43 outside partnerships after a department-wide review found the agreements did not align with the Trump administration’s priorities.
Interior Secretary Burgum axes 43 partnerships and scraps $4M in funding after a department-wide review flagged groups tied to DEI, environmental justice and services for illegal immigrants as ‘operating in direct opposition’ to the Trump administration’s mission. The terminated… pic.twitter.com/LUeiMYerkw
— Fox News Politics (@foxnewspolitics) June 11, 2026
