47The 47 Files
←︎ All topics

The blueprint · the people · the power

Project 2025.

The Evangelical Right-Wing Plan to Remake Government.
Follow the people carrying it forward.

Read the proposals. Identify the authors. Compare the blueprint with the decisions made in office. The accountability question is who gains power—and whose protections are weakened.

· About 8 minutes

01 · The basic breakdown

More than a book.

Heritage described four connected parts: a policy guide, a personnel database, an administration academy and a first-180-days playbook. Recruitment and training were intended to make the proposals usable immediately.

Heritage’s description of the four pillars
01

Policy

What to change.

02

Personnel

Who to appoint.

03

Training

How to use the machinery.

04

Playbook

What to do first.

The guide is a program of proposals, not legislation. The cards below are a reading map; portfolio links identify the officials to scrutinize, not additional authors.

Eight policy areas in the blueprint

02 · The people and their connections

From the policy network
to the seats of power.

Authorship, recruitment, contribution and political association are different relationships. Each entry names the connection and gives its evidence. Cabinet and agency records open in The Cast Members.

Russell Vought wrote the chapter on presidential power and returned to lead the Office of Management and Budget. Brendan Carr wrote the FCC chapter and became its chair. Their appointments carried the project’s ideas into offices with the authority to act on them.

Explore all 15 people and their documented connections

15 of 15 featured connections

John McEntee
Organizer

John McEntee

Personnel recruitment

Photo: Date Right

The former Trump presidential-personnel director joined the project as it launched its staffing database. This is a documented recruitment role.

Inspect the connection
Stephen Miller
Organizational link

Stephen Miller

America First Legal

His organization participated in the advisory coalition. ABC reported its July 2024 request to leave the website’s advisory-board list. This is an organizational connection, not a chapter-author credit.

Inspect the connection Open the individual dossier →︎

03 · Compare the plan with the record

From proposals to presidential orders.

The overlap became visible in presidential orders: career-service protections, independent regulators and the Education Department all came under pressure. These records show what Trump ordered and what happened when those decisions reached court.

Records reviewed September 27, 2026. This is a selected documentary comparison, not a live completion score or a claim that the whole project has been implemented.

January 20, 2025

Executive order issued

Career-service protections

Trump restored and amended the Schedule F framework as Schedule Policy/Career. The order says affected employees need not personally support the president, but must faithfully implement lawful administration policy. It establishes a framework for reclassification; it is not a count of completed dismissals.

January 20, 2025

Executive order issued

Ending federal DEI programs

The order directed agencies to terminate DEI and environmental-justice offices and programs to the extent allowed by law, and to report their spending and staffing to OMB. Its text set the administration’s instructions; implementation fell to the agencies.

February 18, 2025

Executive order issued

Bringing independent regulators under White House review

Trump required significant regulatory actions from independent agencies to undergo White House review and gave OMB additional oversight functions. The order preserves an exception for Federal Reserve monetary policy. This is a dated expansion of presidential supervision, not a ruling on the legality of every later application.

March 20, 2025

Closure directed; not abolition by this order

An instruction to close the Education Department

Trump instructed the education secretary to facilitate closure within the law while maintaining services. The order itself does not repeal the statute creating the department. Compare its direction with the blueprint, then follow implementation and litigation separately.

July 14, 2025

Interim stay · not a final merits judgment

Education: the litigation stage

The Supreme Court stayed the injunction against the Education Department restructuring pending appellate proceedings. Its order allowed action at that stage; it did not abolish the department by statute. Read the short order separately from the accompanying dissent.Related passages: Education Department dismantling and staff reductions →︎

The organizations and the money

Follow the institution.
Then follow the restricted grant.

The convening organization

Heritage’s financial portal publishes annual reports, audited statements and a Form 990 link. Its stated donor-disclosure policy is to name donors with their approval. That means the published names are not a complete funding ledger.

Inspect Heritage’s financial records

Organization-wide income is not automatically Project 2025 funding. A claim about a particular donor financing a particular policy needs a designated grant, expense record or other direct evidence.

A coalition is not one bank account

Heritage announced 100 coalition partners in February 2024. The list identifies organizations associated with the project; it does not itemize their financial contributions or make each one an author of the policy chapters.

Read the coalition announcement

Heritage reported more than $150 million in cash and commitments for 2023 across its work. That figure is not a verified Project 2025 budget.Related passages: Project 2025 →︎

Read the fundraising announcement

04 · Before Project 2025

A blueprint with a history.

The name is new. The transition-planning tradition is not. These are selected predecessors in Heritage’s Mandate series, not a complete bibliography of every edition.

1981

The original Mandate for Leadership

Heritage prepared a government-wide policy program for Reagan. The organization describes this as the start of its transition-blueprint tradition; its claims about adoption are its own assessment.

Read the historical source
1984–85

Mandate for Leadership II

A follow-up addressed Reagan’s second term. Heritage identifies parallels with his 1985 inaugural program. Project 2025 belongs to an older effort to turn think-tank proposals into governing instructions.

Read the historical source
2016–17

A three-part program for the next administration

Heritage published Blueprint for Balance, Blueprint for Reform and Blueprint for a New Administration. These predecessors paired budgets with agency changes and presidential priorities.

Read the historical source
2020

Another Mandate edition

Heritage marketed a further Mandate for Leadership for the 2020 cycle. The series continued between the first Trump transition and Project 2025.Related passages: Project 2025 →︎

Read the historical source
2022–23

Project 2025 takes shape

The transition project combined policy with recruitment and training. Heritage released The Conservative Promise on April 21, 2023, calling it the ninth Mandate edition.

Read the historical source
Project 2025 and Agenda 2030 are separate projects

Project 2025 is distinct from the UN’s Agenda 2030. Similar-sounding labels are not evidence of a shared project.Related passages: Project 2025 →︎

05 · Watch the record

Hear how the project was sold.

Inside the training videos

ProPublica and Documented’s video investigation. Published August 2024.

Watch on YouTube

The academy: Conserving America

A full Project 2025 training session published by ProPublica. Advocacy footage from the project itself, not an independent fact-check.

Watch on YouTube

06 · Go to the document

Read it for yourself.

The full 2023 guide is hosted by Heritage. Chapter links use the PDF’s page position; the printed page number is 32 lower after the front matter. Use the contents and search within the document to check the surrounding argument.

How to read this investigation

Use the author list to establish who wrote what, the contributor list for supporting roles, and dated government records for actions. The relationship cards are selected, sourced connections; they do not imply everyone endorsed every recommendation. Later developments can change a policy’s legal or practical position.

Next: The Cast Members →︎ · Executive orders →︎ · The Loyalty Test →︎