The Programs That Vanished: Inside DHS’s Quiet Purge of a Hidden Agenda
Kristi Noem Shuts Down Controversial Federal Programs, Citing Political Indoctrination
In a bold move that’s making waves in Washington, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has officially ended two major federal programs launched under the Biden administration — programs she says were being used to push political and ideological agendas under the cover of counterterrorism efforts.
The programs, known as Invent2Prevent and certain CP3 grants (from the Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships), were originally designed to prevent domestic extremism and radicalization. But according to Noem and her team, they drifted far from their original goals.
“These programs were created to protect Americans, not fund political or cultural activism,” Noem said in a public statement. “It’s time to bring DHS back to its core mission: national security.”
Two Programs Canceled
The first program, Invent2Prevent, involved partnerships with schools and universities, encouraging students to develop ways to combat radicalization and promote resilience in their communities. But over time, the initiative began funding activities focused more on diversity training, identity politics, and inclusion workshops — many of which had little or no direct link to terrorism prevention.
The second cut targeted over $18 million in CP3 grant funding, which had been distributed to nonprofit organizations around the country. Many of these organizations were involved in LGBTQ+ advocacy, DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) programs, and “anti-hate” initiatives aimed at reshaping school environments.
Critics within DHS reviewed the documentation and concluded that the money was being used to fund political messaging rather than national defense goals.
“These grants became tools of activism, not safety,” one DHS official said.
A Shift in Priorities
Under the previous administration, the Department of Homeland Security broadened its definition of security to include preventing “domestic extremism” through education and cultural awareness. However, under new leadership, DHS is narrowing its focus back to traditional homeland threats like terrorism, border security, and cyber threats.
Noem’s cancellation of the programs signals a shift toward removing political or ideological content from federal security operations — especially those that reach into classrooms or community centers.
“Children should be taught how to think, not what to think,” Noem emphasized. “Using counterterrorism dollars to fund identity-based political training is completely unacceptable.”
The Public Reacts
The decision has drawn strong and opposing reactions.
Supporters, especially among conservative circles, hailed the move as long overdue. They argue that taxpayer dollars should never have been spent on programs that promote any particular political or social worldview — particularly in schools.
“This is a win for parents and a win for common sense,” one commentator said. “The government should be focused on real threats, not social engineering.”
On social media, many praised Noem’s move as a clear sign that the new administration is serious about cutting “woke waste” from federal agencies.
But critics warn the cuts will have real consequences for vulnerable communities, especially students from marginalized backgrounds.
Progressive leaders and civil rights groups argue that DEI and LGBTQ+ programs were aimed at preventing bullying, promoting acceptance, and supporting mental health, not indoctrination.
“This isn’t about ideology — it’s about dignity and safety,” said one education advocate. “Cutting these programs sends the message that inclusion doesn’t matter.”
Some even suggested the move was politically motivated and could spark legal challenges in the future.
A Broader Government Review
The termination of these two programs is part of a larger review now underway across federal departments. The goal, according to sources close to DHS, is to identify and eliminate any program that prioritizes political ideology over public safety or national interest.
This approach aligns closely with the broader agenda of the current administration, which has promised to root out what it sees as the “politicization of government.” Officials are now reviewing other grants, partnerships, and initiatives in education, health, and defense agencies.
“If a program promotes ideology instead of security, merit, or efficiency — it’s on the chopping block,” one source said.
What Comes Next
For now, the affected organizations and schools will need to adjust quickly. Some had already begun implementing curriculum changes or hosting trainings using DHS funds that are now frozen. Others may have to seek private donations or state funding to continue their work.
Meanwhile, Noem made clear that this is only the beginning.
“This is not about targeting communities,” she said. “It’s about ensuring that government programs serve the American people — not political causes.”
Conclusion
Kristi Noem’s decision to cancel these high-profile programs marks a clear turning point in how federal agencies define their role in cultural and educational issues. For supporters, it’s a long-awaited return to basic government accountability. For critics, it’s a troubling rollback of inclusion and support systems for students and communities who rely on them.
One thing is certain: the debate over ideology, education, and national security is far from over.