The Trump administration wants to eliminate the nation’s university centers on developmental disabilities and rethink the way Individuals with Disabilities Education Act programs are funded, but a new budget proposal spares some disability programs that were expected to be on the chopping block.

In a 1,224-page blueprint and accompanying documents from federal agencies, the White House is offering a more detailed look at the president’s budget request for the fiscal year that begins in October.

The administration released a budget summary in early May calling for Congress to cut non-defense discretionary spending by 22.6% and slash the federal budget by $163 billion. That document lacked specifics, but it fueled concern among disability advocates who were already on alert after a widely circulated budget document was leaked from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that outlined plans to zero-out funding for protection and advocacy agencies, state councils on developmental disabilities, the lifespan respite program, University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities and other programs people with disabilities rely on.

Now, advocates say that the documents show the administration intends to retain funding for the developmental disabilities councils, the developmental disabilities programs at protection and advocacy agencies, the lifespan respite program as well as the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. Those programs will move together from the Administration for Community Living, which is being shuttered, to HHS’ Administration for Children, Families and Communities, according to the plan.

At the same time, however, the administration wants to end funding for other disability programs including University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities and a program at protection and advocacy agencies that helps ensure people with disabilities have access to voting.

“Most alarming is the proposed elimination of funding for University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities, which provide critical services, research, training, and advocacy for people with developmental disabilities and their families,” said Kristyn Roth, chief marketing officer at the Autism Society of America.

Known as UCEDDs, the centers have existed in every state for more than 60 years and provide everything from early intervention programs and autism evaluations to training on developmental disabilities for families, self-advocates and professionals in the community.

“The elimination of UCEDDs from the DD network is yet another example of the administration’s aggressive attack on higher education institutions and people with disabilities, and it is clear that the secretary (of health and human services) and the administration do not understand our work,” said Lillie Heigl, senior policy advisor at the Association of University Centers on Disabilities.

The budget proposal also includes major changes to IDEA. While funding for the program would be largely level, some pieces would be consolidated. Per the plan, preschool grants as well as many activities currently overseen by the Department of Education’s Office of Special Education under IDEA Part D would instead be folded into grants that are distributed to states under Part B.

This change would affect Parent Training and Information Centers, technical assistance centers, training for new special educators and general educators, assistive technology and accessibility supports and more, according to Selene A. Almazan, legal director at the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, or COPAA, a nonprofit that advocates for the rights of students with disabilities and their families. The effort is part of the administration’s push to give more control over education to the states, but it would require Congress to modify IDEA, Almazan said, adding that her group opposes such a change.

Meghan Burke, a professor of special education at Vanderbilt University, said that giving states more authority over how IDEA funds are allocated has pros and cons.

“On the one hand, such a formula could help states tailor the funding to their specific needs,” she said. “On the flip side, it removes federal oversight for special education. For example, the move of Parent Training and Information Centers to states could create a conflict of interest. It could be hard for a center that would be state funded under the draft budget to educate and empower families about their rights and, potentially, enact their safeguards.”

The shift toward state control and efforts to reorganize programs and limit funding at the federal level are worrisome, said Colin Killick, executive director at the Autistic Self Advocacy Network.

“The president’s proposed budget would be extremely harmful to people with disabilities,” he said. “These proposed moves will mean that many of the programs our lives rely on — programs that have literally saved our lives — will be made more politicized, less resourced and less effective.”