A Democratic bill with 15 Democratic cosponsors · See all 15 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Access to School Supplies Act of 2026 directs the Secretary of Education to run a pilot program that provides grants to local educational agencies. These grants are intended to help agencies acquire school supplies for students and instructional staff at no cost. The program aims to increase student access to necessary supplies to create a stable learning environment and improve academic achievement, especially for low-income students. Grants will be awarded competitively to up to 10 qualified local educational agencies per year. The bill includes specific funds reserved for outlying areas and Bureau of Indian Education schools. The program is scheduled to end after September 30, 2031.
Yes· 3 of 17
- Scored +9
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Directly removes the cost of school supplies for families in high-poverty schools.
- Scored +8
Would children be better off under this?
Provides free school supplies to students in high-poverty schools.
- Scored +8
Would students be better off under this?
Provides essential tools for learning at no cost to the student.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?
The bill authorizes $100 million in annual spending, which increases government expenditures.
- Scored -2
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
The bill increases government spending by authorizing $100 million annually for grants.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased access to learning materials: The bill aims to provide school supplies at no cost to students and instructional staff, which can help maintain a stable learning environment (Section 2(a)).
-
Academic support for low-income students: A stated purpose of the act is to improve student academic achievement, specifically focusing on help for low-income students (Section 2(a)(3)).
-
Support for teachers and staff: The funds can be used to provide supplies for instructional staff, which includes teachers, paraprofessionals, and librarians (Section 2(b)(1) and Section 4(c)).
-
Geographic diversity in assistance: The Secretary is instructed to ensure that grants reach a diverse range of areas, including urban, suburban, and rural locations (Section 4(f)).
-
Dedicated resources for specific regions: The bill reserves funds specifically for outlying areas and schools operated or funded by the Bureau of Indian Education (Section 3(a)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Administrative limitations: Local educational agencies are restricted in how they use the grant money, as they can reserve no more than 2 percent of the grant for administrative costs (Section 4(e)).
-
Limited number of recipients: The pilot program is limited to awarding grants to no more than 10 qualified local educational agencies per year (Section 4(a)).
-
Strict fund usage requirements: Agencies must ensure that the grant funds are used to supplement, rather than replace, existing non-Federal funds (Section 5).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Directly removes the cost of school supplies for families in high-poverty schools. Would children be better off under this? — Provides free school supplies to students in high-poverty schools. Would students be better off under this? — Provides essential tools for learning at no cost to the student. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Provides set-aside funding specifically for Bureau of Indian Education schools. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Targets high-poverty schools which disproportionately serve minority students. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Targets high-poverty schools which disproportionately serve minority students. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Includes rural areas and outlying territories in the grant distribution. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Targets high-poverty schools often found in urban areas and requires geographic diversity. Would business owners be better off under this? — Increased procurement of school supplies may benefit supply vendors.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Reduces the financial burden on low-income families by providing necessary school supplies for free. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The bill targets high-poverty schools and provides dedicated funding for Bureau of Indian Education schools.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into public schools? — Provides direct grant funding to local educational agencies for school supplies.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — Specifically includes rural areas and outlying territories in the grant distribution requirements.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Expands the role of the Secretary of Education in managing school supply grants. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires annual reports on how funds were expended at each school.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — Providing free supplies to low-income students may improve long-term academic achievement and human capital. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The grant funds will be used to purchase supplies, potentially benefiting vendors of school supplies. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The bill increases government spending by authorizing $100 million annually for grants. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — The bill authorizes $100 million in annual spending, which increases government expenditures.
- 9/3/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- 15 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Alma AdamsDemocrat · North Carolina
Suzanne BonamiciDemocrat · Oregon
Shontel BrownDemocrat · Ohio
Wesley BellDemocrat · Missouri
Yvette ClarkeDemocrat · New York
Troy CarterDemocrat · Louisiana
Greg CasarDemocrat · Texas
Jesús GarcíaDemocrat · Illinois
Jahana HayesDemocrat · Connecticut
Pramila JayapalDemocrat · Washington
Jonathan JacksonDemocrat · Illinois
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Ayanna PressleyDemocrat · Massachusetts
Rashida TlaibDemocrat · Michigan
Frederica WilsonDemocrat · Florida