A Democratic bill with 6 Democratic cosponsors · See all 6 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
This bill, titled the Quality Educator Partnership Act, aims to support educators and address critical shortages in the teaching workforce. It establishes new federal offices within the Department of Education focused on the educator workforce and educational technology. The legislation authorizes grants for educator preparation programs, state workforce design initiatives, and research to improve teacher retention and student achievement. Additionally, it creates a National Educator Service Corps to provide scholarships and stipends to students entering high-need teaching fields in exchange for a service commitment. The bill also mandates comprehensive data collection on educator preparation and performance across the country.
Yes· 3 of 30
- Scored +8
Does this put more money into public schools?
The bill authorizes billions of dollars in federal grants for public school educator preparation, staffing, and professional development.
- Scored +6
Would children be better off under this?
By addressing teacher shortages and improving educator training, the bill directly enhances educational quality and student achievement for children.
- Scored +6
Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this?
Young adults entering the teaching profession benefit from substantial scholarships, living stipends, and clinical residency pay.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
The legislation authorizes billions of dollars in new federal spending and grants without offsetting revenue measures.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Financial Support for Future Teachers: Under Section 302, eligible students enrolled in teacher preparation programs for high-need fields can receive scholarships up to $15,000 per year, monthly living stipends, and a $25,000 annual stipend for a one-year clinical residency. This helps ease the financial burden on individuals training to become educators.
-
Targeted Help for High-Need Schools: Section 213 and Subtitle B of Title II provide grants to partnerships and states to improve recruitment, preparation, and staffing in high-need schools and areas facing severe teacher shortages. This ensures that underserved communities receive better-supported and well-prepared educators.
-
Civil Rights and Equity Oversight: Section 103 requires annual evaluations of the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights staffing and resources to ensure compliance with civil rights laws. This provision protects equal access to a high-quality education and profession-ready educators for every student regardless of race, income, or disability.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Service Obligations and Repayment Penalties: Under Section 302, students who accept scholarships and stipends through the National Educator Service Corps must agree to work as full-time teachers in a qualifying high-need school for a specific number of years. If a participant fails to complete this service obligation or program requirements, the financial assistance they received is converted into a federal loan that must be repaid with interest, which could create significant debt for individuals who cannot finish their service.
-
Data Collection and Reporting Burdens: Section 105 mandates extensive data collection and reporting requirements for states and educator preparation programs regarding teacher credentials, vacancies, retention rates, and student performance. While intended to track workforce needs, these complex reporting demands may place a heavy administrative burden on local educational agencies and institutions.
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 children be better off under this? — By addressing teacher shortages and improving educator training, the bill directly enhances educational quality and student achievement for children. Would students be better off under this? — Students gain access to well-prepared, fully certified educators and enhanced learning resources through federal investments. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults entering the teaching profession benefit from substantial scholarships, living stipends, and clinical residency pay. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The legislation directs resources and high-quality educators toward high-need, low-income schools and communities. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The bill explicitly prioritizes rural local educational agencies and schools for recruitment and retention grants. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — The bill prioritizes funding for minority-serving institutions like the Augustus F. Hawkins Centers of Excellence and targets equity in high-need schools. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Support for bilingual education and English language acquisition programs improves outcomes for Hispanic students and educators. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The legislation specifically reserves funds and grants for schools operated or funded by the Bureau of Indian Education. Would union members be better off under this? — The bill explicitly protects collective bargaining rights and involves labor organizations in educator workforce partnerships. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Large urban school districts facing severe teacher shortages and high concentrations of low-income students will benefit from targeted grants. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — General improvements to educator quality and civil rights oversight benefit Asian American students and educators. Would immigrants be better off under this? — The bill supports bilingual education and English language acquisition programs that assist immigrant students and educators. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class families entering education benefit from financial support, and communities see strengthened public school systems. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — The legislation includes specialized training for educators to better support students with disabilities and ensures civil rights enforcement. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Veterans transitioning into civilian careers can benefit from teacher preparation pathways, scholarships, and stipends. Would women be better off under this? — Because the education workforce is predominantly female, investments in teacher support and childcare stipends provide direct benefits to women.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into public schools? — The bill authorizes billions of dollars in federal grants for public school educator preparation, staffing, and professional development. Does this make college cost less? — Section 302 provides scholarships up to $15,000 per year and living stipends for students enrolled in teacher preparation programs. Does this put more money into scientific research? — The bill establishes research centers and awards grants for studying educational technology, artificial intelligence, and educator workforce strategies. Does this reduce what student borrowers owe or repay? — The National Educator Service Corps provides loan-like financial assistance that is discharged upon completing service commitments in high-need schools. Does this get reliable internet to more people? — The establishment of the Office of Educational Technology and digital literacy initiatives helps integrate technology tools into schools.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The legislation requires comprehensive annual reporting and data collection on educator preparation, qualifications, and civil rights compliance. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Title II provides substantial planning and implementation grants directly to States to design their own educator workforce initiatives. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill creates new federal offices within the Department of Education and imposes extensive national data collection and reporting requirements.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The bill mandates civil rights evaluations and targets resources toward underrepresented groups and high-need, diverse schools to narrow equity gaps. Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — The legislation supports specialized preparation for educators to better serve students with disabilities and maintain equal access. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Targeting grants and financial assistance to high-need, low-income schools helps improve educational outcomes that lift communities out of poverty.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill provides substantial funding and grants to recruit, prepare, and hire new educators, creating jobs in the teaching profession. Is this likely to grow the economy? — Investing in educator preparation and education infrastructure supports workforce development and long-term economic productivity. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — The legislation authorizes billions of dollars in new federal spending and grants without offsetting revenue measures.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — The legislation specifically prioritizes rural educational agencies and high-need rural communities for educator workforce grants.
- 11/12/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 10/26/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/24/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- 3 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.
Suzanne BonamiciDemocrat · Oregon
Jahana HayesDemocrat · Connecticut
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Chellie PingreeDemocrat · Maine
Emilia SykesDemocrat · Ohio
Frederica WilsonDemocrat · Florida